Warheads or Airheads?

March 31, 2006: An earthquake measuring 6.0 on the Richter scale hits the area of Doroud and Boroujerd in Lorestan province in west Iran, killing about 50 people.

The toll also includes 800 injured and massive amounts of damage across Iran. Meanwhile, nations pour aid into Iran including the United States which obviously has strained relations. Amidst the ruins and people losing their lives.. What does a nation like Iran do? Lets test missiles!

Friday, March 31st - TEHRAN, Iran (AP) -- Iran successfully test-fired a missile that can avoid radar and hit several targets simultaneously using multiple warheads, the military said Friday.

Sunday, April 2nd -TEHRAN, Iran (AP) -- Iran announced its second major new missile test within days, saying Sunday it has successfully fired a high-speed underwater missile capable of destroying huge warships and submarines.

Tuesday, April 4th - TEHRAN, Iran (AP) -- Iran said Tuesday it has tested a second new radar-avoiding missile, the latest weapon to be unveiled during war games in the Gulf that the military says are aimed at preparing the country's defenses against the United States.

Hmmm. It all comes down to priorities... almost like the whole Hurricane Katrina situation for the United States, a battle on two fronts - just doesn't win the "hearts and minds" of the people your government serves. But for Iran, a nation plagued by a history of earthquakes... if they keep this up, there will be no nation to defend.

Turning the Other Way

According to PRwatch, the United States government has no problem using propaganda in Iraq as an effort to "win the hearts and minds" of the Iraqi people. The Lincoln Group, responsible for producing mass amounts of "news" placed in newspapers has undergone an investigation by the military. The military has cleared Lincoln Group of any wrong-doing:

"The findings are narrow in focus, and conclude that the Lincoln Group committed no legal violations because its actions in paying to place American [information operations troops]-written articles without attribution were not expressly prohibited by its contract or military rules."

Hmmm... so an investigation is done by an "independent third-party" that has nothing to do with the Lincoln group? Nope. The Lincoln group is actually funded by the United States military at a sum of $7 million. So of course the US military is going to "clear" the Lincoln Group of any wrong doing... I guess they took tips from Lincoln Group to fuel their lies. Money buys friends.

iTunes+Famine= iNeed

How bad is it?
And those poor poor Europeans...

The Russian Konnection: Follow the $cuds

Confusion and surprise has fueled the international community especially the United States after documents revealed Russian intelligence had informed the now captured Iraqi President Saddam Hussein of the impending US invasion. An exchange of information between Hussein and the Russians revealed the troop movements from neighboring Kuwait and other logistical details.

Is the Russian connection with Iraq any real surprise? Hardly. During the Iran-Iraq War of in much of the 1980's, while the United States was tangled with Iran-Contra Affair and the Embassy Crisis in Tehran, Iraq was mostly armed by Russia including the infamous "Scud" or SS-1 (NATO terms) missile. The complete transfer of military missile technology to allow Iraq to manufacture their own version of the Russian design may indicate that Russian intelligence has been far seeded into the Iraq way before. According to Defense Journal, Russian has supplied many nations with Scuds:

Countries with Scud Missiles
Country	Ballistic Missiles 150 to 1000 Km
Belarus	Scud B
Bulgaria	Scud B
Czech Republic	Scud B
Hungary	Scud B
Poland	Scud B
Romania	Scud B
Russia	Scud B
Slovakia	Scud B
Ukraine	Scud B
Egyp	Scud B
	Scud C ?
Iran	Scud B
	Scud C ?
Iraq	Scud B
Libya	Scud B
	Scud C ?
Syria	Scud B
	Scud C ?
Yemen	Scud B
Afghanistan	Scud B
Kazkhastan	Scud B
Tajikistan	Scud B
North Korea	Scud B Scud C ?

It can be assumed that many nations were either part of the former USSR and had a share of the military from the breakup and that most of these nations were also part of the former Warsaw Pact (Bulgaria, Romania, etc.) and were bound to recieve military assistance from Russia.

This leaves the Middle East. The Middle East Review of International Affairs states that:

From the mid-1950s until its dissolution four decades later, the Soviet Union played a key role in helping Arab States improve their military capabilities. Throughout the Cold War, the Soviet Union supplied advanced military equipment, trained officers in its military schools and provided in-country military advisors to regional allies such as Egypt (before 1972), Syria, Libya, Yemen, Algeria and Iraq. This assistance was provided in the context of U.S.-Soviet competition for influence in the Middle East and therefore under very favorable conditions, often practically free of charge or under long-term loan arrangements that were never expected to be repaid.

Iraqi military even the airforce is primarily all Russian including the MiG-29:

Soviet Union had provided extensive military assistance to Iraq, and at the same time, continued its efforts to gain leverage on Iran. In early 1987, Moscow delivered a squadron of twenty-four MiG-29 Fulcrums to Baghdad. Considered the most advanced fighter in the Soviet arsenal, the MiG-29 previously had been provided only to Syria and India. The decision to export the MiG-29 to Iraq, also assured Iraq a more advantageous payment schedule than any offered by the West and it reflected Soviet support for one of its traditional allies in the Middle East. In May 1987 the Soviets provided Iraq with better financial terms in a successful effort to prevent Iraq from buying sixty French Mirage 2000 fighters for an estimated US$3 billion. Caught in a financial crisis, Baghdad welcomed the low-interest loans Moscow extended for this equipment.

With such deep connections with money from the Iran-Iraq War to the Scuds used during Desert Storm - how is it hard to assume that Russian intelligence wasn't involved EVER in Iraq? Citing more than just arms transfers, military assistance that Russia provided could be assumed to possibly in the form of intelligence as well. With a cash-strapped and broken nation like Russia and the Iraq government notoriously overspending on military - the two nations were bound to run into each other in the military market. Russia was more than happy to provide and Iraq was just as happy to accept.

The Bell tolls for Belarus

Slobodan Milosevic, bye-bye. Hello Alexander Lukashenko -amongst a background of rioters and protestors crying foul after the reelection of the Belarus president. With the death of Milosevic, Lukashenko has now been deemed "Enemy No. 1" of Europe.

What's the big deal? Lukashenko won the election in an overwhelming victory, securing 82.6% victory. After winning, many thousands and the opposition accused the incumbent Lukashenko of rigging the election. Soon, police were sent out to quell rioters... in a not so 'gentle' way.

Belarus is called the "last big dictatorship" of Europe after the fall of Serbian President Milosevic. Lukashenko has been blamed for undermining and retarding the Belarus economy since he came into power. Additionally, his government was blamed for massive amounts of human right's violations. Human Rights Watch says the government has had a history of shutting down independent media, controlling opposition parties, and in was blamed for rigging the vote earlier (2004):

The government took full advantage of defective electoral legislation to manipulate the election campaign and engineer the outcome of the vote. An Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe (OSCE) observer mission to the October vote emphasized that the poll was undermined by problems with the election laws, including: the accreditation process for independent election observers; rules regarding early voting and the storage of the resulting ballots, and procedures for adjudicating electoral complaints.

Another section about journalists in Belarus:

Journalists who criticize the government face prosecution. On September 30, a court convicted Alena Rawbetskaya, the editor-in-chief of the independent newspaper Birzha Informacii (Stock-exchange Information), on defamation charges and fined her 1.3 million rubles (approximately U.S.$630), after the paper criticized the upcoming referendum. On the day of the elections, Pavel Sheremet, a Russian journalist from Channel One television was arrested on charges of “hooliganism.” Channel One broadcast two documentaries immediately prior to the elections in which Sheremet described the Lukashenka government as dictatorial. Sheremet was later released and the case against him suspended pending additional investigation.

From the United Nations Human Rights Commission Website, numerous documents were found written to the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights - many of which were authors or religious groups facing trial or sedition for criticising the government. One of these involves a teacher and a newspaper:

The facts as submitted by the author

2.1 The author - a teacher in a high school - is a representative of the NGO - Belarusian Helsinki Committee (BHC) in the city of Krichev (Belarus). On 24 March 1999, the national newspaper "Narodnaya Volya" (People's Will) published a declaration, criticizing the policy of the authorities in power. The declaration was written and signed by representatives of hundreds of Belarusian regional political and non-governmental organizations (NGO), including the author. The latter observes that the declaration contained an appeal not to take part in the forthcoming local elections as a protest against the electoral law which the signatories believed was incompatible with "the Belarusian Constitution and the international norms".

2.2 On 12 April 1999, the author was called to the Krichev Prosecution Office to explain his signature on the above-mentioned open letter. He states that only two of the four NGOs in Krichev who also signed the appeal were called to the Prosecutor's Office, since they were considered as belonging to the political opposition.

2.3 On 26 April 1999, the author was summoned to appear before the Krichev District Court. The judge informed him that his signature on the open letter amounted to an offence under article 167, part 3, (1) of the Belarusian Code on Administrative Offences (CAO) and ordered him to pay a fine of 1 million Belarusian rubles, the equivalent of two minimum salaries. (2) According to the author, the judge was not impartial and threatened to sentence him to the maximum penalty – 10 minimum monthly salaries, as well as to report him to his employer if he did not confess his guilt.

So with a pretty deep involvement and well known reputation for crushing or shutting up any opposition, the Belarus government is well known for many human rights violations. Condoleeza Rice recently commented on the riots, calling them a great effort to overthrow "tyranny". The Belarus publication Belarus Today, posted a story calling the riots and protests an American-backed plot to overthrow the government with some very shocking accusations:

The man also said a colonel from the Georgian security services and American instructors had conducted examinations, and that the Americans had told them to bomb four polling stations at schools in Minsk during voting Sunday. “The Americans told us to organize four explosions at schools. The place and time [of the attacks] were to be told [to us] later. Concrete locations were not indicated,” the man said.

Wow... independent media or government-fueled PR? You decide...

Meanwhile I may now know why the United States is not fond of Lukashenko:

Bringing the Devil back to Hell

BBC has reported that Charles Taylor, former Liberian president and human rights violator, is in the process of being handed over from Nigeria, where he was in exile.

Why so important? Taylor is accused of fueling years of war in Sierra Leone turning the nation in a literal hell-on-earth. He armed and backed rebels in the neighboring nation in exchange for diamonds. As a result, more than 10,000 people died and many witnessed some of the worst atrocities in Western African history including the very nation he governed. Refugees spilled across borders of Liberia and Guinea only to meet even more hardship.

In a CNN report:

Taylor's forces included children, often dressed in costumes and blond wigs. Often under the influence of drugs, they were noted for their brutality.

David Crane a former Chief Prosecutor of the Special Court for Sierra Leone, signed the indictment for Charles Taylor and wrote for Jurist :

The unsealing of his indictment was a carefully laid plan to humble Africa’s most powerful warlord before the law and to bring world attention to this African leader who destroyed two West African nations, Sierra Leone and Liberia, and was individually criminally liable for the murder, rape, maiming, and mutilation of over a million human beings.

Charles Taylor was still around since 1990 when the war in Sierra Leone was just peaking, FOR ALMOST 16 YEARS!... It is unbelievable that the focus of attention is shifted towards dictators like Saddam Hussein while Taylor is committing even some of the worst atrocities possible. But for some reason or the other, international time (meaning the United States) and money is not spent on helping bring Taylor to justice even as he destabilized almost all of Western Africa. As of this posting, NY Times or CNN have not reported this meanwhile Saddam's obsession with Doritos gets all the attention.

Sky's the limit... unless you are from Africa

The Chicago Tribune reports that the European Union released a list of 92 airlines that are condemned from flying to European airports. Reason being, that much of these carriers lack security oversight for their airliners.

Of them, most of the carriers are from Africa:
50 from Congo
14 from Sierra Leone
7 from Swaziland
Liberia
Equatorial Guinea
Kenya

Hardly a surprise?

Air Mauritania was given a grace period to meet security standards set by the EU. Ariana Afghan airlines and a carrier from North Korea have also been restricted to flying to Europe.

Alright so banning airlines telling them to meet certain standards understandable... but how do you expect that when most of these airlines are from Africa and belong to nations that are even below third world to invest money and time into "airlines" rather than trying to fix their own problems?

Sierra Leone and Congo are not even remotely close to stable... Meanwhile, the EU plans on sending troops to Congo for a peacekeeping mission. You'd think the organization keeps communication open between all its units... who really cares about blacklisted airlines now?

The EU says:

The use of poorly maintained, antiquated or obsolete aircraft, the inability of the airlines involved to rectify the shortcomings identified during the inspections and the inability of the authority responsible for overseeing an airline to perform this task.

Wow... you think so? How about a little something called foreign investment? Maybe that would help. Can any of the nations afford the latest model Boeings and Airbus? Obviously none of these nations on the list could care less about an airline blacklist... this just doesn't help.

Back to Basics

I apologize for the lapse in posting... I was frustrated since the blogger server screw up during which I deleted 3 long posts out of frustration and panic.. right now I am backed up with four posts that are still under process.

Meanwhile... Afghanistan before U.S. intervention: war-lord lain, fundamentalist, seemingly lawless, almost equivalent to an eastern or should I say Islamic version of the wild-west... After a tiring invasion the result is a make-shift democractic government reflective of the wills of the people... or is it?

The United States is deeming a death sentence on a Muslim to Christian convert "ridiculous" in a recent story by CNN. The government of Afghanistan maybe based on democractic process but is rooted in Sharia or Islamic law.

This brings up an argument.. does democracy = secularity? The American definition seems not apply here at all, but after sacrificing money, time, and troops lives the result is still a strict society in which "Death" is a plausible punishment for such a "crime". What have we really achieved?

And if this is the result of "democracy" then how can we protest if it was done by democractic means? Also, if this truely is the "will" of the people... then what more can we say? Former Italian President Francesco Cossiga:

"It is not acceptable that our soldiers should put themselves at risk or even sacrifice their lives for a fundamentalist, illiberal regime," Cossiga wrote.

Wow... that doesn't sound like the Taliban AT ALL...

Frustration....that's all....

Just a book recommendation: "I, is for Infidel" is written by journalist Kathy Gannon, who in this book takes an in-depth and very objective look into Afghanistan pre-9/11 to post-9/11 and the international mistakes involved... Gannon also talks about a group of nuns held captive for spreading Christianity... From the looks of it, nothing seems to have changed.

Blogger problems

I lost some drafts of posts on 3/13 and 3/15 because of the blogger outage with a filer or something. I went nuts thinking it was my computer and deleted some posts because I thought they were "infected" or something... damn me and my lack of computer knowledge.. Anyways the problem's on the Blogger end and being a newbie blogger was like mixing dynamite and fire. My panic was only hastened further as I kept getting messages like this:

HTTP Error 403 - Forbidden
(what I thought: "OH MAN, the gov't finally caught up with me!")

550 Could not open: No such file or directoryblog
(what I thought: "bye-bye blog...")

errors: 001 java.io.IOException: EOF while reading from control connection
(what I thought: I was too busy running Norton Antivirus 4895749857 times and refraining from throwing my computer out the window)

Since I couldn't figure out the arcane language, I automatically panicked for quite awhile... in a 3 hour period... with bloodshot eyes.

Tech support! stat!..... no reply

I soon found the help at the forums, there is something comforting about being part of a group with the same exact problems... Hope everyone else is up an running.

Serenity now, Serenity now...

The Abyss

More American's feel as though the entire situation in Iraq continues on a downward trend. According to a new poll by CBS, this poll marked the anniversary when Bush viewed Iraq as a quick operation. Under the poll, the major statistics are:

27% believe the war will last 5+ years
13% believe civil war will break out in the future
7 in 10 believe Iraq is in civil war
15% believe that the United States will succeed in Iraq
36% believe that success maybe likely
47% believe it is not likely or not at all likely that the United States will succeed in Iraq
52% of families with military ties believe that the situation is bad for the United States
50% of Americans believe the government isn't giving enough for US troops in Iraq
66% of Americans believe Bush "paints a rosy picture of Iraq"

Is it really all that bad? Recent violence revealed 86+ bodies in a 30 hour period and possibly more to come. Not at all "rosey". But what does Bush do? Place a blame, create a diversion by blaming Iran for fueling the violence in Iraq. How about we keep the focus on Iraq? and please, give us straight, hard facts... there is absolutely nothing "rosey" about war.

It only makes me wonder what Americans believe about Afghanistan...

Propaganda for Hire

Local residents unresponsive to your peace-making efforts? Do you have trouble with insurgents while occupying a sovereign nation? Troop morale problems? Loss of the regional stability? Trust issues? Difficulty creating a democracy in a suitable time-frame? Are you trying to turn people who hate United State's military presence around? Lincoln Group is for you!

Who is the Lincoln Group? We are:

A Strategic Communications and Public Relations Firm Providing Insight and Influence in Challenging and Hostile Environments

Currently we are hiring:

The New York Times reported January 2, 2006, that the Lincoln Group "has been compensating Sunni religious scholars in Iraq in return for assistance with its propaganda works ... The company's ties to religious leaders and dozens of other prominent Iraqis is aimed also at enabling it to exercise influence in Iraqi communities on behalf of clients, including the military. ... Lincoln has also turned to American scholars and political consultants for advice on the content of the propaganda campaign in Iraq, records indicate

We were recently responsible for:

- Planting news stories paid by the United States government to make it look as if they were doing a favorable job to Iraqis.
- Sold the War effort to the Iraqis
- Signed a $300 million contract to continue altering foreign opinion on the United States

And we will continue to fight for you! (at tax-payers expense of course)

Extreme America

Could Islamic Extremism be rising in the United States? In a London Arabic Daily, Al-Quds Al-Arabi, that younger generations of Muslims in the United States are becoming suspectible to Islamic extremism. Dr. Muhriz Al-Husseini points to normal developing teenagers undergoing the normal phase of rebellion as a "path" to extremism, a tool looked for by religious propagandists to plant a seed for extremism:

These agents] then pass them on to religious propagandists, who live in a number of American cities. The most important criteria for choosing these youths are their natural propensity for rebellion, their lack of fluency in Arabic... [and] their feelings of alienation and suffering due to their indeterminate identity - that is, [their] identity that is neither Eastern nor Western, but split...

The United States as a new hotbed for Islamic extremism? Pretty far-fetched, but probable according to current reports which include a University of North Carolina - Chapel Hill student running his car through the university, and Islamic youths rallying against the cartoon at Unversity of California, Irvine.

As odd as it may seem... could the United States secularity become its own worst enemy? I hope not...

Around the Horn of Africa

Fellow blogger True Liberal and his blog Whatliberalbias, brought to the forefront an often neglected region about the plight in the Horn of Africa. True Liberal hits the nail on the head when he describes the over 20 million threatened by famine and the lack of international response to the region. Moreover, the threat of famine is only one problem amongst numerous problems that have stemmed from the region.

The Horn of Africa is mainly composed of the nations of Ethiopia, Eritrea, Djibouti, and Somalia. Eritrea splintered from Ethiopia, carving itself out of the coastline Ethiopia once had with the Red Sea. War has decimated Eritrea and Ethopia in which 70,000 have died, and are currently negotiating disputed boundaries lines. According Reuters, Eritrea is one of the most militarized governments in the world. Somalia as we know, is overrun by warlords and almost completely lawless.

What does this all mean? In a report by the United States Institute of Peace, the Horn of Africa maybe becoming a hotbed for terrorism. Including the small nation of Djibouti:

Whether or which terrorist groups operate in Djibouti is difficult to assess. However, the groundwork to support such groups has expanded: in the last five years a new Islamic Center has been opened, supported by Saudi Arabia; reportedly, the number of mosques has grown from approximately 35 to over 100, financed and often staffed from outside Djibouti. The young cleric in the most important mosque in Djibouti City reportedly was trained at the Cairo theological center known for its radical Islamist doctrine. Economic links to individuals in the United Arab Emirates (U.A.E.) and Somalia are close as are communal links to families in Yemen.

This war-torn, famine-threatened area only seems to be getting worse as time progresses. But how much is being done? From The World Factbook, each of these nations list Islam as the main faith that each of the societies adhere to. Under Islam, the basic conditions required for its followers:

The 'Five Pillars' of Islam are the foundation of Muslim life:

	Faith or belief in the Oneness of God and the finality of the prophethood of Muhammad;
	Establishment of the daily prayers;
	Concern for and almsgiving to the needy;
	Self-purification through fasting; and
	The pilgrimage to Makkah for those who are able.

#3 strikes the most in terms of how much are other Islamic nations doing for the Horn of Africa or even for other fellow Muslims? The United Nations World Food Programme (WFP) tallies the amounts of money contributed by donor nations for supplying food aid around the world. Amongst the nations, the United States has contributed the most. In terms of Islamic nations, no Middle Eastern nation even breaks the top 20, and in fact, only two Islamic nations do: Pakistan (still dealing with its earthquake aftermath) and Mauritania (a relatively poor West African nation). With countries such as the United Arab Emirates, Qatar, Saudi Arabia (#29) accounting for some of the richest countries in the world... how is it that they do not contribute more to the plight in the Horn of Africa? For nations that are non-secular and based upon Sharia and Islamic law, the pillars become a foundation of their society...

Money for the most part is wasted, take for example the Palm Islands being built in UAE. For nations that are built upon a "humble" religion of Islam, they retain so much of an identity as capitalistic nations... It just becomes another question of "practice what you preach"

Reading between the Front-lines

The Los Angeles Times reports that the military will continue to pay Iraqi newspapers to publish articles that are favorable to the United States. Apparently according to the military, such an act is favorable and is not in violation with any law. In an earlier article by the BBC, the United States admitted back in December 2005 that it was done to refurbish and improve the United States image by the Iraqi public. And in doing so:

"We do empower our commanders with the ability to inform the Iraqi public that everything we do is based on fact" ~ Major Gen Rick Lynch

Just how the whole invasion of Iraq was done on factual and clearly linked evidence?

The LA Times also further reported that the stories were presented coming from independent journalists when they were actually being generated by the military.

The irony of it all is almost fully transparent... We hold our constitutional right of free speech and link it to a free an independent press. The very foundation of democracy is critiqued by the existence and functioning of a free press allowing the public to keep a check government in order to uphold the right to "petition the government for the redress of grievances".

How are we supposed to plant the supposed "democracy" onto another nation if we ourselves are that contradictory? How are we supposed to be a model of democracy for Iraq if we can't even uphold the First Amendment? Only the Iraqi people can trust their government, and in doing so, you must allow an independent media to allow them to do that for the public. It is as simple as "practice what you preach"...

Marijuana, Prostitution, Euthanasia = Thumbs up, Burqa = Thumbs down(?)

Reuters reports that the Netherlands government is considering banning the burqa - the veil that many Islamic women wear across their face. Netherlands maybe the first nation to actually ban the burqa leading many Islamic women to resort to wearing surgical masks if the ban goes through.

Reasons for this ban equates to security measures...um right. As much as the burqa has conjured thoughts of demeaning or unequal rights to women in the Islamic religion, for a nation that so freely allows and is known for the use of cannabis, legalizing prostitution, and also allows euthanasia... how does a burqa harm such a society? In such a free society it becomes difficult to rationalize the ban especially when one may see the burqa as against free rights compared to one who dons a burqa as a symbol of their faith maybe even chastity... it is all too relative.

For whatever reasons banning the burqa at this point in time in Europe is just another log being placed into the raging fires of "Islamophobia" ... it is just not going to help anyone.

The broken record: Here we go again

For the umpteenth time, the United Kingdom and United States look to withdraw their forces in Iraq by early 2007 now according to "senior defense ministry sources" in a Reuters report. Then there is the usual denial by the United States military saying there is no "timetable" on such a withdrawl...

Meanwhile, "Brokeback Mountain" has swept every award show....

Nuclear Con-fusion

CNN reports that during Bush's trip to India, a new deal was struck in cooperation with abiding to requests to allow international inspectors and advisors to India's nuclear sites in exchange for arms sales which include combat aircraft such as the F-16 and F-18. Probably helping them overcome their aging MiG fleet they acquired mostly from Russia back in the Cold War.

What does this mean? Well its a little "tit-for-tat" type of deal... an effort to reduce the threat and build-up of nuclear arms between India and its rival, Pakistan. So rather than allowing a rise in nuclear arms build-up, funding a conventional arms build-up somehow makes the whole situation "breathable".

The story fails to bring into light the number of Arms Control Amendments passed against India and Pakistan during the rise of the nuclear and arms standoff. One in particular was passed in 1999:


Brownback II

Adopted 1999. Incorporated into the fiscal year 2000 defense appropriations bill (Public Law 106-79).

Gives the president indefinite authority to waive, with respect to India and Pakistan, all the provisions of the Glenn, Symington and Pressler amendments. States that the "broad application" of export controls on Indian and Pakistani government agencies and private companies suspected of having links to their country's nuclear or missile programs is "inconsistent" with the national security interests of the United States, and urges the application of U.S. export controls only against agencies and companies that make "direct and material contributions to weapons of mass destruction and missile programs and only to those items that can contribute to such programs."

The Brownback Amendment II is arms the United States president with the ability to waive the prior amendments on controlling the arms race in South Asia. Of the prior amendments the Pressler Amendment banned any economic or military assistance in 1985 to Pakistan if it did possess a nuclear device, forcing the nation strapped for cash to abide by the amendment. During that time the United States supplied Pakistan's air force made up of mainly F-16's:

The Air Force relies on aging Mirage III and V variants, Chinese models of older Soviet MiGs, and a few F-16A Falcons delivered in the 1980s. Any qualitative edge Pakistan might once have enjoyed over India is gone, except perhaps in subsystems and electronic warfare components. In 1994 the air force was organized into eighteen squadrons, with a total of 430 combat aircraft. The mainstay of the air force was the F-16 fighter. Of the forty aircraft originally acquired, thirty-four were in service, divided among three squadrons. Some were reportedly grounded because of a lack of spare parts resulting from the 1990 United States suspension of military transfers to Pakistan (see The United States and the West , ch. 4). Pakistan had an additional seventy-one F-16s on order, but delivery has been suspended since 1990.

In other words, Pakistan's air force is grounded in comparison to the all shiny new F-16 fleet India will be getting soon. Contradictory? It seems like it, especially when Pakistan was shafted and given no nuclear aid from the United States, its key "ally" in the war against terror. So you provide nuclear assistance (for civilian use of course), help arm a rival nation with new weaponary, but give nothing to a nation that provides military assistance, air-space, and the use of strategic locations during the ground-war in Afghanistan.... This just doesn't look right, way too unbalanced. According to DoD, Pakistan recieves $1.5 billion in military aid from the United States from for the year 2005-2009 but a mere $110 million for earthquake aid...

Although the United States calls for Pakistan to become a "democracy" that may soon fall onto deaf ears after all that Pakistan has provided for the United States military. Even at that, the State Department has not declared Pakistan a "terrorist" nation even though India has accused Pakistan of fueling insurgency in Jammu and Kashmir and in fact asked for the recall of the Pressler Amendment back in 1999 saying that terrorists would use weapons supplied by the United States to the Pakistan military to fan the flames in Kashmir. So is the United States wary of providing further military assistance to Pakistan in fear that it may turn around like the Stinger missles in Afghanistan (Pakistan did recognize and support the Taliban)? So do you say that Pakistan is a terrorist state, or keep using them until you get your money's worth - all $1.5 billion?

It just sounds like the region is just becoming more continously destablized... I don't know how arms deals equate to further peace between two rival nations. I mean they are both third-world nations, it would seem to wise to try to stay away from "weapons" and provide assistance in the form of technology, infrastructure, education, even more aid for earthquake hit areas of Pakistan and tsunami ravaged coast of Eastern India - in other words, money and aid where it is needed most, not to escalate straining relations in South Asia or to further fund the "supposed" war on terror.

Double O Jaws

According to reports, the Pentagon is actually "mulling" the possibility of using sharks as spies. The British publication New Scientist, believes that a sharks natural ability to glide silently through water and detect chemical signals from miles away has had DARPA (Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency) shell out money to develop technology to put electrodal implants in the sharks to control them. God knows how much money is being spent on that.

But hey, according to the same article, the New York Police Department looks to employ mice that can find explosives and RDX.

Maybe we can have them patrol United States ports if the deal goes through. But what if we have a" U-2" type incident when some nation captures sharks with implanted electrodes? God forbid. Might as well attach "frickin lasers to their heads" (a la Austin Powers)....

But jeez, come on! "mulling", really? are you serious???

Follow the Leader...

BBC reports that Rushdie and couple of other writers have issued a "warning" in a French newspaper against the violence stemming from the publishing of the infamous cartoons. One of the striking aspects of the story are the number of writers that were exiled or went into hiding for their works which I had no clue about, the list includes:

• Salman Rushdie - Indian-born British writer with fatwa issued ordering his execution for The Satanic Verses
• Taslima Nasreen - exiled Bangladeshi writer, with fatwa issued ordering her execution
• Chahla Chafiq - Iranian writer exiled in France
• Irshad Manji - Ugandan refugee and writer living in Canada
• Mehdi Mozaffari - Iranian academic exiled in Denmark
• Maryam Namazie - Iranian writer living in Britain

More to add to your reading list...