A United Nations' Abomination Against Women: Where Is Obama?

In an exclusive story entitled "U.N. Elects Iran to Commission on Women's Rights", Joseph Abrams of FOXNews.com informs us that the U.N. elected Iran to its Commission on the Status of Women without even a request for an open vote from the United States:

"Without fanfare, the United Nations this week elected Iran to its Commission on the Status of Women, handing a four-year seat on the influential human rights body to a theocratic state in which stoning is enshrined in law and lashings are required for women judged 'immodest.'

Just days after Iran abandoned a high-profile bid for a seat on the U.N. Human Rights Council, it began a covert campaign to claim a seat on the Commission on the Status of Women, which is 'dedicated exclusively to gender equality and advancement of women,' according to its website.

Buried 2,000 words deep in a U.N. press release distributed Wednesday on the filling of 'vacancies in subsidiary bodies,' was the stark announcement: Iran, along with representatives from 10 other nations, was 'elected by acclamation,' meaning that no open vote was requested or required by any member states — including the United States."

http://www.foxnews.com/world/2010/04/29/elects-iran-commission-womens-rights/

Under Iran’s Penal Code, adultery by a woman is punishable by stoning. Article 102 of the Penal Code states that women will be buried up to their breasts for the purpose of execution by stoning, and Article 104 provides that the stones thrown at the woman should “not be large enough to kill the person by one or two strikes, nor should they be so small that they could not be defined as stones.”

You will recall that in response to an earlier blog entry (http://jgcaesarea.blogspot.com/2010/04/jg-caesarea-middle-east-iq-test_25.html), "anonymous" wrote that "the United States is in rapid decline because of people like you, Jeffrey Grossman." If you ask me, I think the Obama administration is doing a fine job of dragging the U.S. down without any help from me.

Compugen, a Molecular Locksmith

Anyone familiar with this blog knows that I like movies, and one of my favorites is the 1984 science fiction comedy hit "Ghostbusters" about three eccentric New York City parapsychologists who trap ghosts for a living. Perhaps you recall the scene in which Dr. Peter Venkman knocks on the door of Dana Barrett, who is possessed by the "Gatekeeper". Dana asks Venkman, "Are you the Keymaster?" Venkman replies, "Not that I know of," whereupon Dana slams the door in his face.

What does any of the above have to do with Compugen?

Last Thursday, Compugen announced its twelfth discovery platform for the prediction of peptides to block disease associated protein-protein interactions. Okay, but what should this mean to a simpleton like myself?

Interactions between proteins are critical to many biological functions. For example, signals from the binding of proteins to receptors on the exterior of a cell are conveyed to the inside of that cell, triggering events within the cell, many of which are crucial for our ongoing life processes, but some capable of inducing diseases, e.g., various cancers.

What has Compugen accomplished with its newly announced PPI Blockers Discovery Platform? In a nutshell, Compugen is able to identify protein-protein binding sites responsible for inducing certain diseases, and is further capable of designing peptides that can block the portal where the relevant proteins bind.

How significant is this capability? Imagine if you, without a map or instructions, were asked, (1) to find a specific door in New York City, possessing an excruciatingly intricate lock, and (2) to insert a key with a size and configuration exactly tailored to that lock, so as to prevent the person with the real matching key from opening the door. Now imagine this on a molecular level. Difficult? Absolutely!

Now let's place the PPI Blockers Discovery Platform in perspective: In March 2010, Compugen announced its eleventh discovery platform, no less remarkable than its twelfth, for the discovery of cell penetrating peptides for drug delivery, which tackled the seemingly insuperable problem of getting therapeutics past the cell membrane. In March 2008, Compugen announced the development and validation of its Blockers of Disease Associated Conformation ("DAC Blockers") Discovery Platform for the identification of peptides that block proteins from adopting their disease associated conformations, which addressed yet another biological conundrum (see: http://jgcaesarea.blogspot.com/2009/08/compugen-evolution-of-new-platform-for.html). After ten years of R&D, Compugen is creating a unique suite of complementary discovery tools, mediating biological processes on the molecular level and providing answers for critical unmet drug discovery needs.

In a world beset with economic and political problems, I continue to take refuge in the joy provided by the scientific advances of this remarkable little company.

[As noted in prior blog entries, I am a Compugen shareholder, this blog entry is not a recommendation to buy or sell Compugen shares, and in mid-September 2009 I began work as a part-time external consultant to Compugen. The opinions expressed herein are mine and are based on publicly available information. This blog entry has not been authorized or approved by Compugen.]

Honor Killings in the Muslim World: An Untreated Epidemic

It is estimated by the UN that there are 5,000 "honor killings" of Muslim women each year, which are perpetrated by family members - grandfathers, fathers, uncles, husbands, brothers - and that go largely unpunished. This number does not take into account the related "quaint" practice of mutilating women's faces and bodies, also common throughout the Muslim world. And let there be no mistake: "Honor killings" have been exported to the U.S., Canada and Western Europe by immigrant Muslim families. Above is a picture of Amina Said, 18, and her sister Sarah Said, 17, who were brutally murdered by their father in Irving, Texas in 2008. If you have the stomach for more, learn about the 2009 decapitation of Aasiya Z. Hassan, below, by her husband, the founder of Bridges TV in Buffalo, New York, which sought to portray Muslims in a more positive light. Now hold onto your thoughts for just a moment.

In response to my prior blog entry "JG Caesarea Middle East IQ Test, Question No. 4: 'What Do Maureen Dowd and Ross Douthat Have in Common?'", I received a comment, sent by "anonymous", which:

- labeled me a "typical American right wing clown";

- said that I hate Muslims;

- stated that Saudi Arabia and Iran are the "FRINGE" of the Muslim world

- stated that of Indonesia, India, Pakistan and Bangladesh, "only Pakistan has serious issues with Islamists";

- stated that "Indonesia has its problems with Islamists, but most Muslims there are devout but non-violent";

- stated "the United States is in rapid decline because of people like you, Jeffrey Grossman."

Obviously this angry person didn't take the time to scroll down and discover my opposition to U.S. involvement in Afghanistan. (Does this place me to the left of Obama?) Also, if this angry person had bothered to read further, he/she would have discovered that I am pro-choice, as reflected in a previous response to Ross Douthat. Right? Left? Meaningless to me. If I could choose, I would label myself a radical moderate, i.e. an oxymoron, who much prefers the company of dogs to most, but not all, politicians (there have been several persons in government who were extremely kind to me over the course of my lifetime).

I hate Muslims? I know and have worked with many Muslims, and I don't think you will find anyone who has ever detected any hatred coming from me.

Saudi Arabia and Iran comprise the "fringe" of the Muslim world? If so, where do you place the despotic regimes of Libya, Sudan, Yemen, Syria and Egypt?

Of Indonesia, India, Pakistan and Bangladesh, "only Pakistan has serious problems with Islamists"? Peculiar. Although willing to discount the Jakarta and Bali bombings in Indonesia ("The Bali bombers and their ilk are no different than Timothy McVeigh and co. in the U.S."), this angry person obviously chooses not to remember the Mumbai, India terror attack in late 2008 which resulted in the deaths of 179 people.

Indonesia has few problems with Islamists? On April 19 Indonesia’s Constitutional Court ruled that a 45-year-old law banning religious blasphemy was constitutional and that persons found guilty of "heresy" could be sentenced to up to five years in prison. No problems with Muslim extremists in Indonesia? Yeah, right.

The United States is in decline because of me? And here I always thought that America's current problems stem from Obama's inane decision to escalate U.S. involvement in Afghanistan, combined with financial abuses which have also gone unremedied by the Obama administration.

But in case you didn't notice, the angry person's comment ignored my reference to "honor killings". Is this because it has become politically correct to paper over such phenomena in the hope of ultimately bridging cultural differences, in much the same way that Obama is currently reaching out to the world's tyrannies?

As I noted above, some 5,000 Muslim women each year fall victim to "honor killings", yet 5,000 is just a number. It is easy for us to shrug off numbers, but there can be no ignoring the horror of individual incidents, so allow me to acquaint you with yet another such instance which occurred earlier this year in "moderate" Turkey:

"The father and grandfather of a teenage girl buried alive for talking to boys have been arrested and are being held for trial, authorities in Turkey say.

The two men were detained after an informant told police that the missing 16-year-old girl had been the victim of an honor killing, The Guardian newspaper in London reported Friday.

Medine Mimi's body was found in sitting position in a 6 1/2 foot deep hole under a chicken pen outside her family's home in Turkey's southeastern province of Adiyam in December.

The coroner said a post-mortem examination found a large amount of soil in her lungs and stomach, indicating that she had been buried alive and suffered a slow and agonizing death, The Times of London reports."

http://www.upi.com/Top_News/International/2010/02/05/Details-of-honor-killing-shocks-Turkey/UPI-13441265385117/

In short, I don't hate Muslims; however, I believe strongly in women's rights and abhor the practice of "honor killings", which the angry person who responded to my blog chose to ignore. Moreover, I believe that Obama must honor his promise to recognize Armenian Genocide. I also believe that Obama has an obligation, for example, to recognize Iran's horrifying persecution of its Baha'is. Nothing whatsoever comes from sweeping these problems under the rug - Turkish, Persian or otherwise. As stated many years ago by Supreme Court Justice Louis Brandeis, “Sunlight is the best disinfectant.”

JG Caesarea Middle East IQ Test, Question No. 4: "What Do Maureen Dowd and Ross Douthat Have in Common?"

Are you more intelligent than Obama?

No, you still can't reply in the affirmative inasmuch as you tried answering Questions Nos. 2 and 3 of the patented JG Caesarea Middle East IQ Test (http://jgcaesarea.blogspot.com/2010/04/jg-caesarea-middle-east-iq-test.html) and failed miserably. Well, here's your chance once again to redeem yourself. As in the past, I already asked Obama this question (in this instance, earlier today), and he came up with the wrong response, so if you answer correctly, you can shout to the entire world, "I am smarter than the president of the United States!"

Ready? Excited? Let's begin:

"What do Maureen Dowd, a dyed in the wool liberal, and Ross Douthat, an inveterate conservative, have in common?"

As in the past, you have 10 seconds to respond. Not enough time? You think I care? . . . . Finished writing? Pencils down!

What? You answered that they're both New York Times columnists? That's exactly the same answer I received from Obama. Did you also call him this morning and ask him for the question? Were you trying to cheat? I like that, but it still doesn't earn you points.

The correct answer to Question No. 4?

You will recall that Maureen Dowd earlier this year visited Saudi Arabia and in a series of New York Times op-eds never once mentioned the barbaric practice of "honor killings" perpetrated against women in that country. While in Riyadh, she also didn't ask the Saudi royal family why women who are gang raped are sentenced to prison and lashed, why death sentences are handed out for "witchcraft", why persons go to jail and are whipped for "practicing magic", why limbs are severed for alleged theft, and why persons guilty of "apostasy" are beheaded.

Today, in a NYT op-ed entitled "Not Even in South Park?" (http://www.nytimes.com/2010/04/26/opinion/26douthat.html), Ross Douthat claims that Western culture "has few taboos that can’t be violated," but depicting the Prophet Muhammad in "South Park" was met with cowardice and censorship. I like "South Park" and can appreciate Douthat's sentiments. However, he also wrote:

"Islam’s radical fringe is still a fringe, rather than an existential enemy."

Actually, Islam's radical fringe is in some instances a "friend". Recall Obama's bow to Abdullah of Saudi Arabia, whose kingdom, as noted above, possesses all the charms of Vlad the Impaler's 15th Century Wallachia.

Also remember Obama's outreach program to "not so friendly" Iran, where adulterers are stoned to death, homosexuals are hanged, women are subjected to "honor killings", and Baha'is and Kurds are brutalized and murdered. Iran will soon have nuclear weapons, thanks to the courage and forethought of Obama, and is developing ballistic missiles capable of hitting the U.S. in 2015. Iran is not an "existential enemy"?

Would Douthat have us believe that both Saudi Arabia and Iran represent the "fringe" of the Muslim world? Or to be more specific, "honor killings" are common throughout the Muslim world, and unfortunately there is nothing "fringe" or "radical fringe" about this abhorrent practice.

So by now, you probably know the correct answer to Question No. 4: Dowd and Douthat share a common desire not to share the fate of Theo van Gogh. Theo van Gogh, who was critical of Muslim treatment of women, was murdered in Amsterdam by Mohammed Bouyeri in 2004. Bouyeri shot van Gogh eight times, tried to decapitate him, and stabbed him several times in the chest.

So now you have failed to answer correctly the first four questions of the patented JG Middle East IQ Test. Sorry, did I hear you correctly? Is there something else you can give me to earn a passing score? Sorry, the patented JG Middle East IQ Test is incorruptible, unless maybe . . .

You're obviously growing wise to the ways of the Middle East, and it shows initiative on your part, but let's not go down that route for now. Keep your head about you (something that poor Theo van Gogh could barely do), answer correctly Question No. 5 in the not too distant future, and you will be able to declare once and for all that you are smarter than Obama!

Frank Rich's "Fight On, Goldman Sachs!": The S.E.C. to the Rescue?

In an op-ed entitled "Fight On, Goldman Sachs!" in today's New York Times (http://www.nytimes.com/2010/04/25/opinion/25rich.html), columnist Frank Rich would have us believe that an S.E.C. civil action against Goldman Sachs will curtail the cult of greed and corruption that has come to characterize the U.S. financial scene. Rich writes:

"And it’s that S.E.C. legal action that has, in a single week, radically transformed the politics and prospects for financial reform in America."

Theater critic Rich does not bother to mention that the S.E.C. is currently beset with its own porn scandal, and apparently unbeknownst to him, the legal action of which he speaks will wind its way through the courts over the course of many years at a cost of tens of millions of dollars to U.S. taxpayers before it is ultimately settled at a future time when it has been long forgotten by the American public.

I wish I could share Rich's faith in the S.E.C. A trading day doesn't go by without manipulation of share prices, e.g., "painting the tape", as a result of the 2007 cancellation of the Uptick Rule, which had protected small investors for 70 years. Given the opportunity to reinstate this critical regulation responsible for safeguarding the financial markets, the S.E.C. recently settled upon some watered down, toothless constraint, which continues to allow fear merchants to short sell start-up, micro cap companies, i.e. the economic future of the U.S., with few limitations and to fleece stockholders.

Even more absurd was the New York Times editorial on Thursday entitled "Mr. Karzai Might Even Agree," which propounded:

"[Obama] should urge Mr. Karzai to ask the United Nations . . . to hand responsibility for overseeing Afghanistan’s economic development to others more proficient in handling money."

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/04/23/opinion/23fri1.html

Given the scandals brewing at home, Obama is hardly in a position to tell Karzai where he should be seeking economic and financial advice.

A Sunday doesn't go by without Frank Rich introducing partisan venom into issues of critical national concern. I realize that this is Rich's stock in trade, but isn't it time to recognize that the economic future of the U.S. transcends politics and requires an appeal for unity and cooperation among America's lawmakers?

"Why Does the USA Persist in Its Missionary Position?"

Yesterday's New York Times editorial, "Mr. Karzai Might Even Agree", received relatively few - a total of 46 - online reader comments; however, I think it is interesting to note the most highly reader-recommended comment, which poignantly observes in relevant part:

"Why does the USA persist in its missionary position - bringing its imperfect democracy and capitalist systems to the rest of the world by force of arms? That is a sure recipe for decline and fall and bankruptcy."

As you all know, I oppose U.S. involvement in Afghanistan, but I never realized that the missionary position could lead to "decline and fall and bankruptcy", and I am rushing this information to Timothy Geithner for his response.

Elsewhere among recent New York Times online comments, I read in response to the April 19 NYT editorial, "Iran, Sanctions and the Memo", the following, which stated in sum total:

"Iran deserve [sic] the nuke to protect itself. Period."

Now what could possibly be memorable about this illiterate gem? I would have thought the answer to be "nothing", but not according to the Times. The Times, in its infinite wisdom (on the same level as the editorial itself, see: http://jgcaesarea.blogspot.com/2010/04/iran-sanctions-and-memo-whose.html), "highlighted" 10 comments, and this was one of the comments chosen for this accolade. So as to avoid any confusion, the Times explains that "highlights" are:

"A selection of the most interesting and thoughtful comments that represent a range of views."

Good to know that the Times deemed this to be one of the "most interesting and thoughtful" responses. Let that be a comfort to any of you who have ever had their online comments rejected by the Times "moderators".

Send Goldman Sachs to Afghanistan?

In an editorial entitled "Mr. Karzai Might Even Agree" (http://www.nytimes.com/2010/04/23/opinion/23fri1.html), The New York Times today observes that President Karzai is visiting Obama in May and calls upon the Obama administration, which "has revamped its military strategy" in Afghanistan, to open a second front in the war on corruption there.

The Obama administration has "revamped it military strategy" in Afghanistan? Yeah, right. Obama decided to waste billions of dollars more on this sinkhole and to expend the precious lives of countless American soldiers, only to withdraw in 2011 and watch the collapse of this corrupt regime.

My online comment, if the Times deigns to post it:

"[Obama] should urge Mr. Karzai to ask the United Nations (which Mr. Karzai now implausibly blames for last year’s presidential election fraud) to hand responsibility for overseeing Afghanistan’s economic development to others more proficient in handling money."

Great idea. Let's send Goldman Sachs to Kabul to manage their money and kill two birds with one stone.