Friday, July 30, 2010

Case in Point - Shahram Amiri

Shahram Amiri is an Iranian nuclear scientist who disappeared in Saudi Arabia in June of last year while undertaking the Hajj or pilgrimage to Mecca.  He surfaces a year later in the "Iranian Interests" section of the Pakistani Embassy in the United States claiming he had been kidnapped by the CIA and subjected to substantial pressure to provide information on Iran's nuclear program.

The US State Department says he was in the USA of his own free will.  He allegedly had defected from Iran and provided information in return for a few million bucks.  The kidnap story is just a cover so he can go home to his family.

Two stories, opposite versions, which do you believe? Who is lying?

After 1954 (and 1980-88), Iran has no reason to love or trust America.  America has no love for Iran of course since they threw out the Shah and are now building a nuclear bomb.  America does not like any country in the Middle east that it cannot control and Persia has been a problem since the days of the Great Game.

Would the CIA kidnap an Iranian nuclear scientist and take him to the USA and try to turn him with psychological pressure and loads of money? If they did and it didn't work, would they actually let him "escape" and then fabricate a cover story, hoping to get him killed on his return home? Would an Iranian nuclear scientist defect to the USA and leave his family behind in Iran to the tender mercies of the Revolutionary Guard?

Would the Iranians treat a returned nuclear scientist defector as a hero simply in order to embarrass the USA?

How do you explain the three videos on YouTube with two different story lines?

My sympathies are entirely with the Iranians.  But I could be wrong.  The CIA and the State Department could be telling the truth.  Like the Irishman who walked past a pub - Hey, it could happen.

Thursday, July 29, 2010

Truth and Lies

A couple of years ago I was in Moscow visiting at a university where a friend teaches English.  At that time the rehabilitation of Stalin as the all-wise, all-knowing all-benevolent Uncle Joe was in full swing.  I asked a couple of students who were in the office what they thought of Stalin coming in second in a "Greatest Russian of all time" competition sponsored by a TV station.

They gave me the answer I expected from a culture that has learned the hard way to keep their heads down and mouths shut - they weren't interested in history, they were interested in the future.  But one of the teachers had a question for me - how do you know what and who to believe?

When it comes to the events of the day, what and who do you believe?  How do you know if you are being lied to?  That is no easy question and there are usually two choices - watch Fox News Channel and believe everything or believe nothing and suspect everything.  Even the cut and dry is not always as it seems.

Back in March, the South Korean Corvette Cheonan sunk after some kind of explosion and 46 sailors were lost. North Korea was the obvious suspect and indeed after an investigation by an international team, it was concluded that a North Korean torpedo from a mini-submarine had sunk the Cheonan.  They even dredged up the remnants of the torpedo.  North Korea vehemently denied it but what would you expect?

So today, I ran into this article  in CounterPunch which raised a whole pot load of issues that never made the 6:00 news.  There is a great possibility that the data was fudged to make it match South Korean expectations and that the ship actually triggered a non-contact mine of which there are several in the shallow water area where it sank and which may even have been south Korean in origin. Truth remains the first casualty of war.

I made up a check list for the teacher in Moscow and would welcome comments and additions:

What is the agenda?
Who benefits?
What evidence?
Who is funding it?
Historical facts – incontrovertible or new evidence? Files available or closed?
Language – rational vs. emotional/hate filled
Official government policy?
How independent is the media?
How free is the country?
What is currently “politically correct”?

Wednesday, July 28, 2010

Thunder and lightning

Tanya didn't have to water her flowers tonight.  We had a dandy thunderstorm that made three passes before disappearing.  For a while we thought she may not have to water them again at all this year as there were hailstones mixed in the first rain.  But only a few and not very large ones, so she lucked out. 

The temps have been running in the high 30's all week so hail would not be unexpected.  All of Russia seems to have the high temperatures too.  Moscow was 39 with smoke from nearby forest/marsh/brush fires. 

I took some food out to the dogs just as the rain was starting.  Bobik slipped out of the gate when I opened it so I let Volk out too for a run.  Gardens are past damage and the chickens should have all been home for the night anyhow.  They weren't gone long.  Once the downpour started we found Volk on the front entry step and Bobik standing by the gate to go in.  Dogs do have enough sense to come in out of the rain.  People, on the other hand, . . .

Speaking of dogs, Maxim has taught Ronald to shake a paw. 

Roman, the historical sculptor

Plasticine (plastileen in Russian) has kept Masha and Maxim entertained for hours.  Roman was here the other day and it kept him entertained too.

Hitler

Stalin

One body, two heads 





Monday, July 26, 2010

Entries to my poetry contest

Insubordinate (no blog but should have one) emailed me the following versions of familiar poems.  They are wonderful and have admittedly an agricultural theme which endears them to my heart even more.

O what can ail thee, farmer man
  Alone and watching carefully
The crops are late and autumn comes
  I am afraid
O what can ail thee, farmer man
  So haggard and so tres concerned
The blight is on these crops of mine
  And spray is dear
_________________________________________ 

I wandered 'cross my fields of green
Waving so slightly in the breeze
When all I once I saw a sheen
A spot of dreaded crop disease
On the heads of my crop so fine
So many there I felt like cryin'
 _________________________________________
On this year's hay crop . . .
Shall I compare thee to last year's hay crop
Thou art more greener and as high as the gate
Heavy rains do fall, beat thee down to earth
And haying time hath all too short a date
 ___________________________________________
I wandered - a lonely little cloud
But friends soon came to have some fun
With driving rain and hail so hard
We pummeled on Saskatchewan
Upon the crops, upon the ground
We flooded basements all around.
__________________________________________________
Grow grain along with me
Riches are yet to be
The rain is much, the GDD are low
Our crops are in Her hand
Mother Nature rules the land
Will we harvest; fear Jack: damage much, still no dough.

With apologies to Keats, Wordsworth, Shakespeare, and Browning .
And many many thanks to Insubordinate. 

Friday, July 23, 2010

The Big Mac Index

The Economist just published its semi-annual Big Mac Index, which compares the price of a Big Mac around the world and uses that to estimate whether the currency is over or undervalued against the USD.  It is not scientific but it is easy to understand.  The Economist says this:

THE Big Mac index is based on the theory of purchasing-power parity (PPP), according to which exchange rates should adjust to equalise the price of a basket of goods and services around the world. Our index shows that Asia remains the cheapest place to enjoy a burger, while those on the hunt for a value meal should steer clear of Scandinavia. The euro, despite its troubles, continues to be expensive when compared with many other rich-world currencies, though the British pound is trading close to its fair value. China's recent decision to increase the "flexibility" of the yuan has not made much difference yet—the yuan is undervalued on the burger gauge by 48%. For more on the Big Mac index see article.


Thursday, July 22, 2010

Why The Rich Should Be Taxed At Lower Rates Than The Middle Class

It's not exactly an explanation of the position. But it does make some sense to the very wealthy. From El Pais:
Translation: "we avoid paying taxes because we don't want to flaunt our wealth."  
 Stolen from The New Republic