Tuesday, October 31, 2006
Sunday, October 29, 2006
The forces of radical Islam are getting very bold in Malaysia; an American couple was subjected to a humiliating, terrifying 2 am khalwat inspection by “religious enforcement officers:” Retired American policeman Randal Barnhart, who was subjected to a 2am raid by religious enforcement officers, is reconsidering his plan to make Malaysia his second home. “After that unpleasant episode two weeks ago, I do not feel like making Malaysia my second home. It is a pity because both my wife and I really love Langkawi,” he said. On Oct 12, Barnhart, 62, and his wife Carole, 61, were in their rented condominium in Kuah when enforcement officers continuously knocked on their door at 2am, accusing them of committing khalwat (close proximity). He said the officers demanded to see his marriage certificate, although he had told them that they were Christians and should not be subjected to Islamic law. “We find it difficult to forget the unpleasant episode. My wife was so terrified by the incident that she fears sleeping in that condominium,” he added. Banhart said the officers were rude and insisted on “seeing the woman” when he opened the door. “My wife had to show herself despite only having a sarong on at that time. We felt humiliated for being treated this way,” he said. He said he had to send his wife back to the United States on the next available flight because she feared people might return to the condominium to terrify her in the middle of the night. She flew home on Wednesday. “I want the religious department to apologise to me and my wife in writing,” Alan note: this provides a taste of what to expect in a Moslem dominated society - be it in an "outwardly free but religiously fanatical" country like Malaysia, in the kind of society that Moslem mullahs wanted to create in Canada by applying Sharia laws - in place of Canadian ones - for Moslem civil matters and a very gentle incident compared to what would have happened in Iran (or perhaps under Sheikh Nasrallah of the Hezbollah shown in the graphic at the top). In the latter case of Iran, the two would have been arrested for not having their marriage license, possible tortured and depending on who the interrogator was, even killed. Perhaps accidentally when their questioning proved too rough. How many of you travel with your marriage license in your baggage? Remember, Canadian journalist Kazemi died for taking photos. And we worry about water boarding terrorists, who are out to kill us, while simple, gentle, non-violent citizens in Moslem countries die under far worse treatment - for existing at all. And yet the Democratic party establishment in America and to some extent in Europe, to garner votes, kisses Moslem toes and other body parts, while attacking Christianity for separation of church and State. Oh! Sorry! Islam uses mosques not churches, calls on Allah and not God and thus is exempt from the Democrats' secular fervor. Right? (Nor are African-American Moslem voters part of the Democratic decision making either, are they?) And in the same mind set will further exacerbate what is still a slowly improving mess in Iraq and bring what goes on there to our shores - in the name of secularity and the pro-Moslem bias they show even in our schools and government organizations. From fear? From stupidity? Mostly from sheer ignorance. Even the White House turns to and listens to virulent anti-USA Islamic pundits for their advice, to set policy on how to handle Moslem matters. Asking the inmates of the asylum how to run it?! As I mentioned in the article "Learn America, Learn" (scroll down to the article), if we do not wake up now, starting with voting against the Democrats in November and what the far left, mindless San Francisco liberalism of Nancy Pelosi as Speaker will bring, we can kiss our lifestyle and way of life goodbye and brace for repeated acts of terrorism on American soil. Just because you are angry or dissatisfied with the Republican administration of President Bush, is not a reason NOT to vote or vote against what is best for America by supporting a Democrat. (Lieberman the only exception). Remember, your not voting at all - if you are a Republican -only makes it easier for Pelosi and her crowd to win! Fewer opposing votes, thus less opposition to overcome. Can you live with what the Democrats will bring in their wake? Compared to what is bothering you now? Think again as bombs go off in our malls because our troop withdrawals freed terrorists and suicide bombers from being needed in Iraq or Afghanistan and free to bring their death and destruction to your American or European back yard. Take a look at the problems in France to get an idea of a still comparatively low key situation, which will escalate. Or what has been happening in "Londonistan". Or the appeasement mindsets of the Pelosi liberals which will ensure Iran gets nukes and the bombs in the malls could become nuclear ones or at least "dirty" fission material ones that contaminate and pollute our cities for decades - long after the enabling Democrats are gone - or many of us are dead. A death toll, far in excess - in multiple of thousands or tens of thousands, of American or Coalition lives now being lost in Iraq or in the Middle East. Are you upset enough at Bush to invite that? If so, you probably belong in an insane asylum yourself and common sense can find no place in your brain. I do NOT care about political parties. I do care about my chances - and all of ours - to survive and have a life to live. For other general comments on this story, please visit: http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1728005/posts and either scroll down to comments or click on "skip to comments at the top.
Thursday, October 26, 2006
Anyone interested in this little "spat" can also see about half a dozen other comments posted. :-)) Back to serious news and postings late this weekend. The Paki Liberal said... Yeah it still would've been an oppressive state with a widening gap between the rich and the poor with no hope for democracy. The blog author and the rest of these idiots who post on this blog are too blind to realize that Iran was actually a flourishing democracy and if it weren't for the CIA's coup against Mossadegh (who was democratically elected, mind you) it would still be the beacon of democracy and freedom to this day. I know most of you idiots will be quick to accuse me of siding with the mullahcracy, but let me assure you, I am pro-democracy to the fullest, unlike most of you hypocrites who only use democracy when it suits your needs. I look forward to the day the mullahs in Iran are gone as much as all of you do. If you want to live in an oppressive state where political dissidents are executed (no different from what it is now except its being used under the guise of religion), then go ahead. But there are a lot of Iranians who want true freedom, not the neo-con view of freedom.I wonder if this "Anti-Mullah" idiot will post up videos of how brutal the SAVAK was, and yet most of you idiots wonder how Khomeini and his thugs end up getting power in the first place. BTW you stupid Persians, neo-cons don't give two shits about you. They only use you when its convenient for their agendas. Morons, I swear. 1:53 PM Alan Peters said... Liberal Paki, I generally ignore comments posted on my site but your opinions require mine in return ..... though your ignorance of who Mossadegh was - is to be expected. Your language tends to show your apparently poor upbringing, which still carries weight in Pakistan or among Paki expatriates.There was surprisingly increasing democratic structure coming into being under the late Shah when the Soviets lost the revolution to the Islamist Mullahs.. Unlike under your hero Mossadegh. "Democratically elected" under whom? Under the rule of the Shah by the pro-Soviet Tudeh party with Soviet support. The "political dissidents" you cite were pro-Soviet movements intent on overthrowing the monarchy on behalf of the Soviets - NOT their personal political freedoms. Other than traitorous ones used as excuses and to inspire Mossadegh to faciliate their aims. Mossadegh quickly became a pawn of the Soviets and was giving them the country on a platter - requiring the CIA intervention you criticize. Not on behalf of the Shah so much as for anti-Soviet ability of reaching the Persian Gulf. The very worst of SAVAK does not scratch the surface of the horrors of the Mullahs. And was directed at Soviet agents/supporters, not the populace. When the MARXIST Mojaheddin and Fedayeen - under Soviet guidance and Soviet urban guerilla specialists operating out of their Tehran embassy, tried once again to take control of Iran and find a path to warm waters, SAVAK quite rightly, but not always adroitly, resisted. The Mullahs which you as a devout, perhaps jihadist PAKI might tend to subconsciously support, stole it out of the mouths of the Soviet surrogates. Try to temper your emotional ignorance and rhetoric with some modicum of real life fact rather than hearsay you so carelessly adopt as the truth. Less perhaps as an uninformed pro-Mullah shill than sourced in anti-Western sentiments, perhaps latent anti-USA tendencies. You should know the subject in great detail - as I happen to - before you disclose the extent of your ignorance and the depth of your bias. And a somewhat foul mouth. 11:06 PM
Wednesday, October 25, 2006
Monday, October 23, 2006
Treason doesn't pay in the long term, as shown below about the New York Times, but hopeful, anti-West Moslems in the USA, encouraged by the Mullahs and Islamist movements overwhelmingly vote for Democrats. The video helps shows why. And why Americans should know better than to fall into the same trap and commit virtual suicide if they vote the Democrats into power. CLICK ON TITLE TO VIEW VIDEO The New York Times Co. reported Thursday that its third-quarter 2006 profit from continuing operations plunged 39.2%. At the New York Times Co., 3Q operating profit was down 48% from the same period in 2005 to $20.5 million on total revenues. The Times Co. said it earned $14 million, or 10 cents per share, compared with $23.1 milion, or 16 cents per share, in the third quarter of 2005. Advertising revenues decreased 5.1% and circulation revenues were down 1.3%. Of course, they'll blame everything else and anything else, but we know the truth.
++++++++++++++++An interesting opinion posted by a visitor to this site which addresses the Moslem or "fifth column" misdirected support. Dear Alan: As a novice in politics and an Iranian-American who doesn't want to have to live under Sharia again here in the West, to my horror and dismay, I have to admit that the academia in the US/West is infested with these so called ME's experts and pundists. UC Berkely is one of these cesspools who breeds and blindly accepts these mullah-zadehs (bacheh mullah) with scholarships from the IRI. They are more numerous in Canada than in the USA. They've been either bought by the IRI or they are truly jihadist brainwashed by their Islamic upbringing and and have become useful and dangerous tools and potential cells. The number of American/Western born "scholars" or Academics/journalists who peddle the IRI's agenda is also skyrocketting. I think one the recent recruits by the "Supreme Council of Cultural Revolution" (i.e. Supreme council of manufactured propaganda against Western Democracies" is no other than Ms. Yvonne Ridely whose op-ed was recently published by the moronic WaPo. This woman calls the suicide bombers, Shahids. (Homicide bombers being called "martyrs"?) Another potential recent (not so recent) recruit is Scott Ridder. ( Alan's note: Wasn't he the one supporting Saddam Hussein and advocating NOT to attack and remove him? He was apparently recently in Iran and came back to write a Pro-Mullah book! This leopard does not change his spots) This other journalist, I think his last name is Vick is another pocketbook sympathizer. The old ones are Gary Sick, Carter et al.and Mr. Royce over at ineffectual/worthless VOA who wastes US taxpayer's money on promoting the IRI agenda instead of US's under our nose and so on. The IRI spends millions of dollars each year to lobby the US/Western-born or Iranian-born journalists, policy makers, and scholars. They are all disgusting and make my blood boil.
Saturday, October 21, 2006
CLICK ON TITLE TO VIEW VIDEO Note the perfect French of the Monarch. What Iran could have been and what it became. Wake up America! You face the same challenges on a much larger scale. He lost his throne, you are losing your way of life just as certainly.
A Warning For America From South Africa (2005 but still applies today - even more so). By Gemma Meyer (Gemma Meyer is the pseudonym of a South African journalist. She and her husband, a former conservative member of parliament, still reside in South Africa.) People used to say that South Africa was 20 years behind the rest of the Western world. Television, for example, came late to South Africa (but so did pornography and the gay rights movement). Today, however, South Africa may be the grim model of the future Western world, for events in America reveal trends chillingly similar to those that destroyed our country. America's structures are Western. Your Congress, your lobbying groups, your free speech, and the way ordinary Americans either get involved or ignore politics are peculiarly Western, not the way most of the world operates. But the fact that only about a third of Americans deem it important to vote is horrifying in light of how close you are to losing your Western character. Writing letters to the press, manning stands at county fairs, hosting fund-raising dinners, attending rallies, setting up conferences, writing your Congressman - that is what you know, and what you are comfortable with. Those are the political methods you've created for yourselves to keep your country on track and to ensure political accountability. But woe to you if - or more likely, when - the rules change. White Americans may soon find themselves unable or unwilling to stand up to challenge the new political methods that will be the inevitable result of the ethnic metamorphosis now taking place in America. Unable to cope with the new rules of the game - violence, mob riots, intimidation through accusations of racism, demands for proportionality based on racial numbers, and all the other social and political weapons used by the have-nots to bludgeon treasure and power from the haves - Americans, like others before them, will no doubt cave in. They will compromise away their independence and ultimately their way of life. (Alan note: specially if the Liberal Democrats win control of the House and Senate in a couple of weeks and leaders like Nancy Pelosi take over). That is exactly what happened in South Africa. I know, because I was there and I saw it happen. Faced with revolution in the streets, strikes, civil unrest and the sheer terror and murder practiced by Nelson Mandela's African National Congress (ANC), the white government simply capitulated in order to achieve "peace." Westerners need peace. They need order and stability. They are builders and planners. But what we got was the peace of the grave for our society. The Third World is different - different peoples with different pasts and different cultures. Yet Westerners continue to mistake the psychology of the Third World and its peoples. Sierra Leone and Zimbabwe are perfect examples of those mistakes. Sierra Leone is in perpetual civil war, and Zimbabwe - once the thriving, stable Rhodesia - is looting the very people (the white men) who feed the country. Yet Westerners do not admit that the same kind of savagery could come to America when enough immigrants of the right type assert themselves. The fact is, Americans are sitting ducks for Third World exploitation of the Western conscience of compassion. Those in the West who forced South Africa to surrender to the ANC and its leaders did not consider Africa to be the dangerous, corrupt, and savage place it is now in Zimbabwe and South Africa. Those Western politicians now have a similar problem looming on their own doorsteps: the demand for power and treasure from the non-Western peoples inside the realm. It is already too late for South Africa, but not for America if enough people strengthen their spine and take on the race terrorists, the armies of the "politically correct" and, most dangerous of all, the craven politicians who believe "compassionate conservatism" will buy them a few more votes, a few more days of peace. White South Africans, you should remember, have been in that part of Africa for the same amount of time whites have inhabited North America; yet ultimately South Africans voted for their own suicide. We are not so very different from you. We lost our country through skillful propaganda, pressure from abroad (not least from the U.S.A.), unrelenting charges of "oppression" and "racism," and the shrewd assessment by African tyrants that the white man has many Achilles' heels, the most significant of which are his compassion, his belief in the "equality of man," and his "love your neighbor" philosophy - none of which are part of the Third World's history. The mainline churches played a big role in the demise of Western influence throughout Africa, too; especially in South Africa. Today's tyrants were yesterday's mission-school proteges. Many dictators in Africa were men of the cloth. They knew their clerical collars would deflect criticism and obfuscate their real aims, which had nothing whatever to do with the "brotherhood of man." Other tyrants, like the infamous Idi Amin, were trained and schooled by the whites themselves, at Oxford, Cambridge, and Harvard. After receiving the best from the West, they unleashed a resentful bloodlust against their benefactors. From what I have seen and read thus far, I fear Americans will capitulate just as we did. Americans are, generally, a soft lot. They don't want to quarrel or obstruct the claims of those who believe they were wronged. They like peace and quiet, and they want to compromise and be nice. A television program that aired in South Africa showed a town meeting somewhere in Southern California where people met to complain about falling standards in the schools. Whites who politely spoke at the meeting clearly resented the influx of Mexican immigrants into their community. When a handful of Chicanos at the back of the hall shouted and waved their hands at them, the whites simply shrunk back into their seats rather than tell the noisemakers to shut up. They didn't want to quarrel. In America, the courts are still the final arbiters of society's laws. But what will happen when your future majority refuses to abide by court rulings - as in Zimbabwe? What will happen when the new majority says the judges are racists, and that they refuse to acknowledge "white man's justice"? What will happen when the courts are filled with their people, or their sympathizers? In California, Proposition 187 has already been overturned. What will you do when the future non-white majority decides to change the names of streets and cities? What will you do when they no longer want to use money that carries the portraits of old, dead white "racists" and slave owners? Will you cave in, like you did on flying the Confederate flag? What about the national anthem? Your official language? Don't laugh. When the "majority" took over in South Africa, the first targets were our national symbols. In another generation, America may well face what Africa is now experiencing - invasions of private land by the "have-nots;" the decline in health care quality; roads and buildings in disrepair; the banishment of your history from the education of the young; the revolutionization of your justice system. In South Africa today, only 9 percent of murderers end up in jail. Court dockets are regularly purchased and simply disappear. Magistrates can be bribed as can the prison authorities, making escapes commonplace. Vehicle and airplane licenses are regularly purchased, and forged school and university certificates are routine. What would you think of the ritual slaughter of animals in your neighbor's backyard? How do you clean up the blood and entrails that litter your suburban streets? How do you feel about the practice of witchcraft, in which the parts of young girls and boys are needed for "medicinal" purposes? How do you react to the burning of witches? Don't laugh. All that is quite common in South Africa today. Don't imagine that government officials caught with their fingers in the till will be punished. Excuses - like the need to overcome generations of white racism - will be found to exonerate the guilty. In fact, known criminals will be voted into office because of a racial solidarity among the majority that doesn't exist among the whites. When Ian Smith of the old Rhodesia tried to stand up to the world, white South African politicians were among the Westerners pressuring him to surrender. When Robert Mugabe of Zimbabwe murders his political opponents, ignores unfavorable court decisions, terrorizes the population and siphons off millions from the state treasury for himself and his friends, South Africa's new President Thabo Mbeki holds his hand and declares his support. That just happened a few weeks ago. Your tax dollars will go to those who don't earn and don't pay. In South Africa, organizations that used to have access to state funds such as old age homes, the arts, and veterans' services, are simply abandoned. What will happen is that Western structures in America will be either destroyed from without, or transformed from within, used to suit the goals of the new rulers. And they will reign either through terror, as in Zimbabwe today, or exert other corrupt pressures to obtain, or buy votes. Once power is in the hands of aliens, don't expect loyalty or devotion to principle from those whose jobs are at stake. One of the most surprising and tragic components of the disaster in South Africa is how many previously anti-ANC whites simply moved to the other side. Once you lose social, cultural, and political dominance, there is no getting it back again. Unfortunately, your habits and values work against you. You cannot fight terror and street mobs with letters to your Congressmen. You cannot fight accusations of racism with prayer meetings. You cannot appeal to the goodness of your fellow man when the fellow man despises you for your weaknesses and hacks off the arms and legs (and heads) of his political opponents. To survive, Americans must never lose the power they now enjoy to people from alien cultures. Above all, don't put yourselves to the test of fighting only when your backs are against the wall. You will probably fail. Millions around the world want your good life. But make no mistake: They care not for the high-minded ideals of Thomas Jefferson and George Washington, and your Constitution. What they want are your posessions, your power, and your status. And they already know that their allies among you, the "human rights activists," the skillful lawyers and the left-wing politicians will fight for them, and not for you. They will exploit your compassion and your Christian charity, and your good will. They have studied you, Mr. and Mrs. America, and they know your weaknesses well. (This includes Islamists, Jihadists and terrorists, inside and outside America, which the Democrats want to treat as a criminal proceeding instead of the war it is). They know what to do. Do you? (Hat tip to Papa Ray)
Friday, October 20, 2006
CLICK ON TITLE TO GO TO VIDEO Farsi language but gives a general view of initial events while they were still minimal and calm. Later escalation included shots being fired into the crowd by the Islamic Regime. With some 700 people wounded and killed. First scenes show wooden club wielding Boroujerdi supporters milling around and one shouts out "break any cameras you see" to protect those on Boroujerdi's side from being filmed by the authorities and later identified from the video. (The Regime meanwhile issued orders to arrest anyone with a camera to prevent their savage actions from being recorded). Then it shows a pro-regime man being brought ot the scene, being clothed on site as a Mullah (white turban makes him a simple "sheikh" not descended from the Prophet - black turbans) begging (as a "cleric") Boroujerdi’s backers to disperse from the area of Boroujerdi’s home. The cleric is rebuffed by supporters of Boroujerdi and rushed away from the scene. At the end of the footage Boroujerdi is seen making his last emotional speech outside his house before his arrest. “…Tell the world that Boroujerdi did not fear death…. He defended an Islam which promotes love and kindness not the Islam that these lot advocate which has brought poverty, corruption, prostitution, addiction ….I don’t want you to risk your lives for me, I just want you to tell the world what happened here.” On the spot and at the time live report of the events were posted here. Click on "Breaking News - Ayatollah Revolts" link in left hand column and then go up to the update. Hat tip to Pajamsa Media
Tuesday, October 17, 2006
ALSO LOOK AT newly posted RECENT NEWSBRIEFS POSTED ON CURRENT "NEWS ROUND-UP" PAGE (link in left hand column). More being posted again, so check regularly. AND AT THE MULTI-LINGUAL PAGE - includes video showing the purchase and sale of HUMAN kidneys in the Iranian Bazaar. Scandinavian language and Farsi. HEADS-UP RE MUSLIM HOLIDAY VIOLENCE: Buzz in CT (Counterterrorism)/security community is Friday may be big day of violence as Muslims celebrate Al-Quds (Jerusalem) Day -- when Big Mo (Mohammed) was supposedly wafted up to Paradise from al-Aqsa mosque. Friday is also juma prayer (special prayer). Then Eid Fetr (Muslim holiday you've seen the U.S. postal stamp) follows on Tuesday. CIFA (Counterintelligence Field Activity) Pentagon looking for even higher terror op tempo in Iraq and Afghanistan on those 2 days. Additionally, increase in Iraq violence intended to drive USA elections into Democrat hands and by terrorists perceptions to their advantage, also expected. Stop their intent by coming out in force and voting for Republican candidates. Even if you do not agree with them! They are better than the result of putting Democrats back in power - as clearly underlined by the terrorists' efforts to derail Bush.
Washington Iranian-Americans are far more numerous in the United States than census data indicate and are among the most highly educated people in the country, according to research by the Iranian Studies Group, an independent academic organization, at Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT). The group estimates that the actual number of Iranian-Americans may top 691,000 -- more than twice the figure of 338,000 cited in the 2000 U.S. census. According to the latest census data available, more than one in four Iranian-Americans hold a master's or doctoral degree, the highest rate among 67 ethnic groups studied. With their high level of educational attainment and a median family income 20 percent higher than the national average, Iranian-Americans contribute substantially to the U.S. economy. Through surveys of Fortune 500 companies and other major corporations, the researchers identified more than 50 Iranian-Americans in senior leadership positions at companies with more than $200 million in asset value, including General Electric, AT&T, Verizon, Intel, Cisco, Motorola, Oracle, Nortel Networks, Lucent Technologies, and eBay. Fortune magazine ranks Pierre Omidyar, founder and chairman of the board of eBay, the wildly popular online auction company, as the second richest American entrepreneur under age 40. Iranian-Americans are also prominent in academia. According to a preliminary list compiled by ISG, there are more than 500 Iranian-American professors teaching and doing research at top-ranked U.S. universities, including MIT, Harvard, Yale, Princeton, Carnegie Mellon, the University of California system (Berkeley, UCLA, etc.), Stanford, the University of Southern California, Georgia Tech, University of Wisconsin, University of Michigan, University of Illinois, University of Maryland, California Institute of Technology, Boston University, George Washington University, and hundreds of other universities and colleges throughout the United States. The Iranian Studies Group (ISG), founded in 2002 by a group of Iranian Ph.D. candidates enrolled at MIT, analyzes social, economic, and political issues involving Iran and Iranians. The group began compiling statistics on the Iranian-American community at the request of Iranian associations and community leaders in the United States who do not have the time or capacity to conduct such research. The ISG arrived at its population estimate of 691,000 Iranian-Americans by assembling a list of 100 family names from the national university examination database in Iran, then conducting a computer analysis of U.S. white page telephone directories to count households with those names. They then multiplied that total by 2.83, the average number of individuals per Iranian-American household as reported in the 2000 census. Overall census counts of Iranian-Americans may be low in part because many people are reluctant to identify their country of origin due to troubled relations between the United States and Iran over the past 25 years, says Ali Mostashari, one of the founders of the Iranian Studies Group. Iranians have achieved a high level of success in the United States because unlike many immigrants, most left their homeland for social, political, or religious reasons, rather than in search of economic opportunity, Mostashari adds. The two large waves of immigrants who came to the United States because of the 1979 revolution in Iran consisted mainly of people with education and assets, he notes. "These were people who could make it to the U.S. and sustain themselves in the U.S. It was a pre-selection, not your typical immigration where people come mainly for financial reasons," he said. In another recently issued report, the Iranian Studies Group has undertaken the mission of convincing Iranian-Americans to become more active participants in the American political process. According to surveys in some major cities, fewer than 10 percent voted in the last presidential election. The report cites the experiences of other ethnic groups, such as Israeli-Americans, Arab-Americans, and Cuban-Americans, to show how Iranians could use their collective voice to influence U.S. foreign policy regarding Iran and address the needs of the Iranian-American community. In addition to its focus on Iranian-Americans, the ISG issues reports about topical issues in Iran, such as earthquake management, and publishes the Iran Analysis Quarterly, which features scholarly articles about social, political, and economic issues in Iran. Through its Development Gateway Project, the group has established Internet links to some 400 articles representing a wide spectrum of views about Iranian development issues. A lecture series brings experts from Iran and the United States to MIT to discuss a broad range of topics, such as The Fate of Local Democracy under the Islamic Republic, Nonviolent Struggle: Liberation without Violence, Temporary Marriage and Women's Rights, and Rethinking Persian Modernity. From my own observations I have come to the conclusion that not all of the new Iranian-Americans have the best interests of America at heart, nor are against the Mullocracy that rules so savagely in Iran. In fact, in my opinion, many of the highly educated and successful ones, who should definitely know better, side with the Mullahs against their new country of choice. Hiding themselves among those who fled persecution but contriving and conspiring against the USA. In some cases openly shilling/advocating for the Mullahs. They duplicitiously and hypocritically use the protection of the freedoms found in America but long forgotten and trampled in post 1979 Iran under the boots of the Mullahs. Don't be fooled by the slippers or flip-flops they wear in public.
Saturday, October 14, 2006
Throw this article at your democrat/liberal/pacifist friends and left-wing history revisionists in their efforts to blame the GOP for Democrat's catastrophes. I base my own Libertarian social mindsets and Fiscal conservative ones on track record and reality not "spin" and not on political party affiliations. Nor on specific religious or ethnic dogma and culture. As a multilingual, multicultural, widely traveled (over a million international air miles) - definitely not a "herd animal" human - I have developed a perceptive eye for reality on a global, big picture scale. And a pretty accurate view of the components that create the big picture. If I see a group like the Democratic party endangering me and my fellow citizens through sheer stupidity - or perhaps more accurately by their desire to grab power at any cost to anyone else - even to the point of cutting off their nose to spite their face, then my hackles rise and I challenge them. And to put the Iraq war they try to use as a political baseball bat, to bash anyone who disagrees with them, into perspective, the USA has about 140,000 soldiers over there. Despite this the people still fear for their lives and worry about their children when they go to school. In just ONE, single State Assembly (State Congress) district of Los Angeles, there are 120,000 active, violent, mostly armed gang members. Residents of the southern half of this district live in constant fear of being killed, when their children go to school their parents worry about them getting shot and killedand hpe they will return homewithout wounds and alive. Gang members regularly shoot and kill children - not in crossfire but on purpose. These are often as young as three or four years old. The number of violent deaths in this district EXCEEDS the number of American soldiers being killed in Iraq! Except as a political tool for the Democrats the war in Iraq is less violent (for the USA) than ONE section of Los Angeles. And we have many similar ones all over the country, so by comparison, the Iraq war is a relatively tiny fight. So why all the hand wringing over Iraq? Before pretending to worry about Iraq, the Democrats should focus on the worse internal war in THEIR congressional and state assembly districts. When they cannot solve this, then how can we expect them to solve the war in Iraq? And they forget that if we cut and run out of Iraq, the bloosdshed there will increase substantially for a while AND THEN the terrorists, no longer facing US and Coalition forces are free to change their focus to operating inside the USA. Or inside Europe. Incidentally, do note that the Al Qaeda and other terrorists groups have begun to increasingly use American gangs as support for their operations. Both ideologically among the Moslem African American ones and paying others like the Hispanic or Russian ones.
The History of Republican "Evil"
As seen through the eyes of DemocratsThe Republican Party was formed in 1854 specifically to oppose the Democrats, and for more than 150 years, they have done everything they could to block the Democrat agenda. In their "abuses of power", they have even used threats and military violence to thwart the Democrat Party’s attempts to make this a progressive country. As you read the following Republican "atrocities" that span three centuries, imagine if you will, what a far different nation the United States would be had not the Republicans been around to block the Democrats’ efforts. March 20, 1854 Opponents of Democrats’ pro-slavery policies meet in Ripon, Wisconsin to establish the Republican Party . May 30, 1854 Democrat President Franklin Pierce signs Democrats’ Kansas-Nebraska Act, expanding slavery into U.S. territories; opponents unite to form the Republican Party . June 16, 1854 Newspaper editor Horace Greeley calls on opponents of slavery to unite in the Republican Party . July 6, 1854 First state Republican Party officially organized in Jackson, Michigan, to oppose Democrats’ pro-slavery policies. February 11, 1856 Republican Montgomery Blair argues before U.S. Supreme Court on behalf of his client, the slave Dred Scott; later served in President Lincoln’s Cabinet. February 22, 1856 First national meeting of the Republican Party, in Pittsburgh, to coordinate opposition to Democrats’ pro-slavery policies. March 27, 1856 First meeting of Republican National Committee in Washington, DC to oppose Democrats’ pro-slavery policies. May 22, 1856 For denouncing Democrats’ pro-slavery policy, Republican U.S. Senator Charles Sumner (R-MA) is beaten nearly to death on floor of Senate by U.S. Rep. Preston Brooks (D-SC), takes three years to recover. March 6, 1857 Republican Supreme Court Justice John McLean issues strenuous dissent from decision by 7 Democrats in infamous Dred Scott case that African-Americans had no rights “which any white man was bound to respect”. June 26, 1857 Abraham Lincoln declares Republican position that slavery is “cruelly wrong,” while Democrats “cultivate and excite hatred” for blacks. October 13, 1858 During Lincoln-Douglas debates, U.S. Senator Stephen Douglas (D-IL) states: “I do not regard the Negro as my equal, and positively deny that he is my brother, or any kin to me whatever”; Douglas became Democratic Party’s 1860 presidential nominee. October 25, 1858 U.S. Senator William Seward (R-NY) describes Democratic Party as “inextricably committed to the designs of the slaveholders”; as President Abraham Lincoln’s Secretary of State, helped draft Emancipation Proclamation. June 4, 1860 Republican U.S. Senator Charles Sumner (R-MA) delivers his classic address, The Barbarism of Slavery. April 7, 1862 President Lincoln concludes treaty with Britain for suppression of slave trade. April 16, 1862 President Lincoln signs bill abolishing slavery in District of Columbia; in Congress, 99% of Republicans vote yes, 83% of Democrats vote no. July 2, 1862 U.S. Rep. Justin Morrill (R-VT) wins passage of Land Grant Act, establishing colleges open to African-Americans, including such students as George Washington Carver. July 17, 1862 Over unanimous Democrat opposition, Republican Congress passes "Confiscation Act" stating that slaves of the Confederacy “shall be forever free”. (Note: confiscated by the Federal government from their former owners). August 19, 1862 Republican newspaper editor Horace Greeley writes Prayer of Twenty Millions, calling on President Lincoln to declare emancipation. August 25, 1862 President Abraham Lincoln authorizes enlistment of African-American soldiers in U.S. Army. September 22, 1862 Republican President Abraham Lincoln issues Emancipation Proclamation. January 1, 1863 Emancipation Proclamation, implementing the Republicans’ Confiscation Act of 1862, takes effect. February 9, 1864 Susan B. Anthony and Elizabeth Cady Stanton deliver over 100,000 signatures to U.S. Senate supporting Republicans’ plans for constitutional amendment to ban slavery . June 15, 1864 Republican Congress votes equal pay for African-American troops serving in U.S. Army during Civil War. June 28, 1864 Republican majority in Congress repeals Fugitive Slave Acts. October 29, 1864 African-American abolitionist Sojourner Truth says of President Lincoln: “I never was treated by anyone with more kindness and cordiality than were shown to me by that great and good man”. January 31, 1865 13th Amendment banning slavery passed by U.S. House with unanimous Republican support, intense Democrat opposition. March 3, 1865 Republican Congress establishes Freedmen’s Bureau to provide health care, education, and technical assistance to emancipated slaves. April 8, 1865 13th Amendment banning slavery passed by U.S. Senate with 100% Republican support, 63% Democrat opposition. June 19, 1865 On “Juneteenth,” U.S. troops land in Galveston, TX to enforce ban on slavery that had been declared more than two years before by the Emancipation Proclamation. November 22, 1865 Republicans denounce Democrat legislature of Mississippi for enacting “black codes,” which institutionalized racial discrimination. December 6, 1865 Republican Party’s 13th Amendment, banning slavery, is ratified. February 5, 1866 U.S. Rep. Thaddeus Stevens (R-PA) introduces legislation, successfully opposed by Democrat President Andrew Johnson, to implement “40 acres and a mule” relief by distributing land to former slaves. April 9, 1866 Republican Congress overrides Democrat President Johnson’s veto; Civil Rights Act of 1866, conferring rights of citizenship on African-Americans, becomes law. April 19, 1866 Thousands assemble in Washington, DC to celebrate Republican Party’s abolition of slavery. May 10, 1866 U.S. House passes Republicans’ 14th Amendment guaranteeing due process and equal protection of the laws to all citizens; 100% of Democrats vote no. June 8, 1866 U.S. Senate passes Republicans’ 14th Amendment guaranteeing due process and equal protection of the law to all citizens; 94% of Republicans vote yes and 100% of Democrats vote no. July 16, 1866 Republican Congress overrides Democrat President Andrew Johnson’s veto of Freedman's Bureau Act, which protected former slaves from “black codes” denying their rights. July 28, 1866 Republican Congress authorizes formation of the Buffalo Soldiers, two regiments of African-American cavalrymen. July 30, 1866 Democrat-controlled City of New Orleans orders police to storm racially-integrated Republican meeting; raid kills 40 and wounds more than 150. January 8, 1867 Republicans override Democrat President Andrew Johnson’s veto of law granting voting rights to African-Americans in D.C. July 19, 1867 Republican Congress overrides Democrat President Andrew Johnson’s veto of legislation protecting voting rights of African-Americans. March 30, 1868 Republicans begin impeachment trial of Democrat President Andrew Johnson, who declared: “This is a country for white men, and by God, as long as I am President, it shall be a government of white men”. May 20, 1868 Republican National Convention marks debut of African-American politicians on national stage; two – Pinckney Pinchback and James Harris – attend as delegates, and several serve as presidential electors. September 3, 1868 25 African-Americans in Georgia legislature, all Republicans, expelled by Democrat majority; later reinstated by Republican Congress. September 12, 1868 Civil rights activist Tunis Campbell and all other African-Americans in Georgia Senate, every one a Republican, expelled by Democrat majority; would later be reinstated by Republican Congress. September 28, 1868 Democrats in Opelousas, Louisiana murder nearly 300 African-Americans who tried to prevent an assault against a Republican newspaper editor . October 7, 1868 Republicans denounce Democratic Party’s national campaign theme: “This is a white man’s country: Let white men rule”. October 22, 1868 While campaigning for re-election, Republican U.S. Rep. James Hinds (R-AR) is assassinated by Democrat terrorists who organized as the Ku Klux Klan. November 3, 1868 Republican Ulysses Grant defeats Democrat Horatio Seymour in presidential election; Seymour had denounced Emancipation Proclamation. December 10, 1869 Republican Gov. John Campbell of Wyoming Territory signs FIRST-in-nation law granting women right to vote and to hold public office. February 3, 1870 After passing House with 98% Republican support and 97% Democrat opposition, Republicans’ 15th Amendment is ratified, granting vote to all Americans regardless of race. May 19, 1870 African-American John Langston, law professor and future Republican Congressman from Virginia, delivers influential speech supporting President Ulysses Grant’s civil rights policies May 31, 1870 President U.S. Grant signs Republicans’ Enforcement Act, providing stiff penalties for depriving any American’s civil rights. June 22, 1870 Republican Congress creates U.S. Department of Justice, to safeguard the civil rights of African-Americans against Democrats in the South. September 6, 1870 Women vote in Wyoming, in FIRST election after women’s suffrage signed into law by Republican Gov. John Campbell. February 28, 1871 Republican Congress passes Enforcement Act providing federal protection for African-American voters. March 22, 1871 Spartansburg Republican newspaper denounces Ku Klux Klan campaign to eradicate the Republican Party in South Carolina. April 20, 1871 Republican Congress enacts the Ku Klux Klan Act, outlawing Democratic Party-affiliated terrorist groups which oppressed African-Americans. (Note: Democrat Senator Byrd was a prominent Ku Klux Clan leader and the Democratic party in Congress and Senate appears tocontinue to support terrorism, though this time of foreign origins). October 10, 1871 Following warnings by Philadelphia Democrats against black voting, African-American Republican civil rights activist Octavius Catto murdered by Democratic Party operative; his military funeral was attended by thousands. October 18, 1871 After violence against Republicans in South Carolina, President Ulysses Grant deploys U.S. troops to combat Democrat terrorists who formed the Ku Klux Klan. November 18, 1872 Susan B. Anthony arrested for voting, after boasting to Elizabeth Cady Stanton that she voted for “the Republican ticket, straight”. January 17, 1874 Armed Democrats seize Texas state government, ending Republican efforts to racially integrate government. September 14, 1874 Democrat white supremacists seize Louisiana statehouse in attempt to overthrow racially-integrated administration of Republican Governor William Kellogg; 27 killed. March 1, 1875 Civil Rights Act of 1875, guaranteeing access to public accommodations without regard to race, signed by Republican President U.S. Grant; passed with 92% Republican support over 100% Democrat opposition. September 20, 1876 Former state Attorney General Robert Ingersoll (R-IL) tells veterans: “Every man that loved slavery better than liberty was a Democrat… I am a Republican because it is the only free party that ever existed”. January 10, 1878 U.S. Senator Aaron Sargent (R-CA) introduces Susan B. Anthony amendment for women’s suffrage; Democrat-controlled Senate defeated it 4 times before election of Republican House and Senate guaranteed its approval in 1919. July 14, 1884 Republicans criticize Democratic Party’s nomination of racist U.S. Senator Thomas Hendricks (D-IN) for vice president; he had voted against the 13th Amendment banning slavery. August 30, 1890 Republican President Benjamin Harrison signs legislation by U.S. Senator Justin Morrill (R-VT) making African-Americans eligible for land-grant colleges in the South. June 7, 1892 In a FIRST for a major U.S. political party, two women – Theresa Jenkins and Cora Carleton – attend Republican National Convention in an official capacity, as alternate delegates. February 8, 1894 Democrat Congress and Democrat President Grover Cleveland join to repeal Republicans’ Enforcement Act, which had enabled African-Americans to vote. December 11, 1895 African-American Republican and former U.S. Rep. Thomas Miller (R-SC) denounces new state constitution written to disenfranchise African-Americans. May 18, 1896 Republican Justice John Marshall Harlan, dissenting from Supreme Court’s notorious Plessy v. Ferguson “separate but equal” decision, declares: “Our Constitution is color-blind, and neither knows nor tolerates classes among citizens”. December 31, 1898 Republican Theodore Roosevelt becomes Governor of New York; in 1900, he outlawed racial segregation in New York public schools. May 24, 1900 Republicans vote no in referendum for constitutional convention in Virginia, designed to create a new state constitution disenfranchising African-Americans. January 15, 1901 Republican Booker T. Washington protests Alabama Democratic Party’s refusal to permit voting by African-Americans. October 16, 1901 President Theodore Roosevelt invites Booker T. Washington to dine at White House, sparking protests by Democrats across the country. May 29, 1902 Virginia Democrats implement new state constitution, condemned by Republicans as illegal, reducing African-American voter registration by 86%. February 12, 1909 On 100th anniversary of Abraham Lincoln’s birth, African-American Republicans and women’s suffragists Ida Wells and Mary Terrell co-found the NAACP. June 18, 1912 African-American Robert Church, founder of Lincoln Leagues to register black voters in Tennessee, attends 1912 Republican National Convention as delegate; eventually serves as delegate at 8 conventions. August 1, 1916 Republican presidential candidate Charles Evans Hughes, former New York Governor and U.S. Supreme Court Justice, endorses women’s suffrage constitutional amendment; he would become Secretary of State and Chief Justice. May 21, 1919 Republican House passes constitutional amendment granting women the vote with 85% of Republicans in favor, but only 54% of Democrats; in Senate, 80% of Republicans would vote yes, but almost half of Democrats no. April 18, 1920 Minnesota’s FIRST-in-the-nation anti-lynching law, promoted by African-American Republican Nellie Francis, signed by Republican Gov. Jacob Preus. August 18, 1920 Republican-authored 19th Amendment, giving women the vote, becomes part of Constitution; 26 of the 36 states to ratify had Republican-controlled legislatures. January 26, 1922 House passes bill authored by U.S. Rep. Leonidas Dyer (R-MO) making lynching a federal crime; Senate Democrats block it with filibuster. June 2, 1924 Republican President Calvin Coolidge signs bill passed by Republican Congress granting U.S. citizenship to all Native Americans. October 3, 1924 Republicans denounce three-time Democrat presidential nominee William Jennings Bryan for defending the Ku Klux Klan at 1924 Democratic National Convention. December 8, 1924 Democratic presidential candidate John W. Davis argues in favor of “separate but equal”. June 12, 1929 First Lady Lou Hoover invites wife of U.S. Rep. Oscar De Priest (R-IL), an African-American, to tea at the White House, sparking protests by Democrats across the country. August 17, 1937 Republicans organize opposition to former Ku Klux Klansman and Democrat U.S. Senator Hugo Black, appointed to U.S. Supreme Court by FDR; his Klan background was hidden until after confirmation. June 24, 1940 Republican Party platform calls for integration of the armed forces; for the balance of his terms in office, FDR refuses to order it. October 20, 1942 60 prominent African-Americans issue Durham Manifesto, calling on southern Democrats to abolish their all-white primaries. April 3, 1944 U.S. Supreme Court strikes down Texas Democratic Party’s “whites only” primary election system. August 8, 1945 Republicans condemn Harry Truman's surprise use of the atomic bomb in Japan. The whining and criticism goes on for years. It begins two days after the Hiroshima bombing, when former Republican President Herbert Hoover writes to a friend that "[t]he use of the atomic bomb, with its indiscriminate killing of women and children, revolts my soul." February 18, 1946 Appointed by Republican President Calvin Coolidge, federal judge Paul McCormick ends segregation of Mexican-American children in California public schools. July 11, 1952 Republican Party platform condemns “duplicity and insincerity” of Democrats in racial matters. September 30, 1953 Earl Warren, California’s three-term Republican Governor and 1948 Republican vice presidential nominee, nominated to be Chief Justice; wrote landmark decision in Brown v. Board of Education. December 8, 1953 Eisenhower administration Asst. Attorney General Lee Rankin argues for plaintiffs in Brown v. Board of Education. May 17, 1954 Chief Justice Earl Warren, three-term Republican Governor (CA) and Republican vice presidential nominee in 1948, wins unanimous support of Supreme Court for school desegregation in Brown v. Board of Education. November 25, 1955 Eisenhower administration bans racial segregation of interstate bus travel. March 12, 1956 Ninety-seven Democrats in Congress condemn Supreme Court’s decision in Brown v. Board of Education, and pledge to continue segregation. June 5, 1956 Republican federal judge Frank Johnson rules in favor of Rosa Parks in decision striking down “blacks in the back of the bus” law. October 19, 1956 On campaign trail, Vice President Richard Nixon vows: “American boys and girls shall sit, side by side, at any school – public or private – with no regard paid to the color of their skin. Segregation, discrimination, and prejudice have no place in America” November 6, 1956 African-American civil rights leaders Martin Luther King and Ralph Abernathy vote for Republican Dwight Eisenhower for President. September 9, 1957 President Dwight Eisenhower signs Republican Party’s 1957 Civil Rights Act. September 24, 1957 Sparking criticism from Democrats such as Senators John Kennedy and Lyndon Johnson, President Dwight Eisenhower deploys the 82nd Airborne Division to Little Rock, AR to force Democrat Governor Orval Faubus to integrate public schools. June 23, 1958 President Dwight Eisenhower meets with Martin Luther King and other African-American leaders to discuss plans to advance civil rights. February 4, 1959 President Eisenhower informs Republican leaders of his plan to introduce 1960 Civil Rights Act, despite staunch opposition from many Democrats. May 6, 1960 President Dwight Eisenhower signs Republicans’ Civil Rights Act of 1960, overcoming 125-hour, around-the-clock filibuster by 18 Senate Democrats. July 27, 1960 At Republican National Convention, Vice President and eventual presidential nominee Richard Nixon insists on strong civil rights plank in platform. May 2, 1963 Republicans condemn Democrat sheriff of Birmingham, AL for arresting over 2,000 African-American schoolchildren marching for their civil rights. June 1, 1963 Democrat Governor George Wallace announces defiance of court order issued by Republican federal judge Frank Johnson to integrate University of Alabama. September 29, 1963 Gov. George Wallace (D-AL) defies order by U.S. District Judge Frank Johnson, appointed by President Dwight Eisenhower, to integrate Tuskegee High School. June 9, 1964 Republicans condemn 14-hour filibuster against 1964 Civil Rights Act by U.S. Senator and former Ku Klux Klansman Robert Byrd (D-WV), who still serves in the Senate. June 10, 1964 Senate Minority Leader Everett Dirksen (R-IL) criticizes Democrat filibuster against 1964 Civil Rights Act, calls on Democrats to stop opposing racial equality. The Civil Rights Act of 1964 was introduced and approved by a staggering majority of Republicans in the Senate. The Act was opposed by most southern Democrat senators, several of whom were proud segregationists — one of them being Al Gore Sr. Democrat President Lyndon B. Johnson relied on Illinois Senator Everett Dirkson, the Republican leader from Illinois, to get the Act passed. June 20, 1964 The Chicago Defender, renowned African-American newspaper, praises Senate Republican Leader Everett Dirksen (R-IL) for leading passage of 1964 Civil Rights Act. March 7, 1965 Police under the command of Democrat Governor George Wallace attack African-Americans demonstrating for voting rights in Selma, AL March 21, 1965 Republican federal judge Frank Johnson authorizes Martin Luther King’s protest march from Selma to Montgomery, overruling Democrat Governor George Wallace. August 4, 1965 Senate Republican Leader Everett Dirksen (R-IL) overcomes Democrat attempts to block 1965 Voting Rights Act; 94% of Senate Republicans vote for landmark civil right legislation, while 27% of Democrats oppose. August 6, 1965 Voting Rights Act of 1965, abolishing literacy tests and other measures devised by Democrats to prevent African-Americans from voting, signed into law; higher percentage of Republicans than Democrats vote in favor. July 8, 1970 In special message to Congress, President Richard Nixon calls for reversal of policy of forced termination of Native American rights and benefits. September 17, 1971 Former Ku Klux Klan member and Democrat U.S. Senator Hugo Black (D-AL) retires from U.S. Supreme Court; appointed by FDR in 1937, he had defended Klansmen for racial murders . February 19, 1976 President Gerald Ford formally rescinds President Franklin Roosevelt’s notorious Executive Order authorizing internment of over 120,000 Japanese-Americans during WWII. September 15, 1981 President Ronald Reagan establishes the White House Initiative on Historically Black Colleges and Universities, to increase African-American participation in federal education programs. June 29, 1982 President Ronald Reagan signs 25-year extension of 1965 Voting Rights Act. August 10, 1988 President Ronald Reagan signs Civil Liberties Act of 1988, compensating Japanese-Americans for deprivation of civil rights and property during World War II internment ordered by FDR. November 21, 1991 President George H. W. Bush signs Civil Rights Act of 1991 to strengthen federal civil rights legislation. August 20, 1996 Bill authored by U.S. Rep. Susan Molinari (R-NY) to prohibit racial discrimination in adoptions, part of Republicans’ Contract With America, becomes law. April 26, 1999 Legislation authored by U.S. Senator Spencer Abraham (R-MI) awarding Congressional Gold Medal to civil rights pioneer Rosa Parks is transmitted to President. January 25, 2001 U.S. Senate Republican Policy Committee declares school choice to be “Educational Emancipation”. March 19, 2003 Republican U.S. Representatives of Hispanic and Portuguese descent form Congressional Hispanic Conference. May 23, 2003 U.S. Senator Sam Brownback (R-KS) introduces bill to establish National Museum of African American History and Culture February 26, 2004 Hispanic Republican U.S. Rep. Henry Bonilla (R-TX) condemns racist comments by U.S. Rep. Corrine Brown (D-FL); she had called Asst. Secretary of State Roger Noriega and several Hispanic Congressmen “a bunch of white men...you all look alike to me” Why African-Americans, Women and Hispanics believe the Democrats have been the source of their current freedoms is a mystery beyond resolution.
Tuesday, October 10, 2006
Anyone seen Bill Clinton or anyone in his administration acting on this information?? He knew it would land in the next adminstration's lap so why bother to get his own hands dirty? Specially when he did not have a clue what to do and generally sympathized with the enemy anyway. Just as Jimmy Carter still does. All building up in the eight Clinton years before Bush came to office and for which we are still paying the price. And for which the Democrats are trying to blame Bush, since, like 9/11 it eventually exploded on his watch. https://www.cia.gov/cia/reports/721_reports/july_dec2000.htm Report to Congress on the Acquisition of Technology Relating to Weapons of Mass Destruction and Advanced Conventional Munitions, 1 July Through 31 December 2000 Scope Note Acquisition by Country: Iran Iraq North Korea Libya Syria Sudan India Pakistan Egypt Key Suppliers: Russia North KoreaChina Western Countries Trends Scope Note The Director of Central Intelligence (DCI) hereby submits this report in response to a Congressionally directed action in Section 721 of the FY 97 Intelligence Authorization Act, which requires: "(a) Not later than 6 months after the date of the enactment of this Act, and every 6 months thereafter, the Director of Central Intelligence shall submit to Congress a report on (1) the acquisition by foreign countries during the preceding 6 months of dual-use and other technology useful for the development or production of weapons of mass destruction (including nuclear weapons, chemical weapons, and biological weapons) and advanced conventional munitions; and (2) trends in the acquisition of such technology by such countries." At the DCI’s request, the DCI Weapons Intelligence, Nonproliferation, and Arms Control Center (WINPAC) drafted this report and coordinated it throughout the Intelligence Community. As directed by Section 721, subsection (b) of the Act, it is unclassified. As such, the report does not present the details of the Intelligence Community’s assessments of weapons of mass destruction and advanced conventional munitions programs that are available in other classified reports and briefings for the Congress. Acquisition by Country: As required by Section 721 of the FY 97 Intelligence Authorization Act, the following are summaries by country of acquisition activities (solicitations, negotiations, contracts, and deliveries) related to weapons of mass destruction (WMD) and advanced conventional weapons (ACW) that occurred from 1 July through 31 December 2000. We excluded countries that already have substantial WMD programs, such as China and Russia, as well as countries that demonstrated little WMD acquisition activity of concern. Iran Iran remains one of the most active countries seeking to acquire WMD and ACW technology from abroad. In doing so, Tehran is attempting to develop a domestic capability to produce various types of weapons—chemical, biological, and nuclear—and their delivery systems. During the reporting period, the evidence indicates determined Iranian efforts to acquire WMD- and ACW-related equipment, materials, and technology focused primarily on entities in Russia, China, North Korea, and Western Europe. Iran, a Chemical Weapons Convention (CWC) States party, already has manufactured and stockpiled chemical weapons — including blister, blood, choking, and probably nerve agents, and the bombs and artillery shells for delivering them. During the second half of 2000, Tehran continued to seek production technology, training, expertise, equipment, and chemicals that could be used as precursor agents in its chemical warfare (CW) program from entities in Russia and China. Tehran continued its efforts to seek considerable dual-use biotechnical materials, equipment, and expertise from abroad—primarily from entities in Russia and Western Europe—ostensibly for civilian uses. We judge that this equipment and know-how could be applied to Iran’s biological warfare (BW) program. Iran probably began its offensive BW program during the Iran-Iraq war, and it may have some limited capability for BW deployment. Iran sought nuclear-related equipment, material, and technical expertise from a variety of sources, especially in Russia. Work continues on the construction of a 1,000-megawatt nuclear power reactor at Bushehr that will be subject to International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) safeguards. In addition, Russian entities continued to interact with Iranian research centers on various activities. These projects will help Iran augment its nuclear technology infrastructure, which in turn would be useful in supporting nuclear weapons research and development. The expertise and technology gained, along with the commercial channels and contacts established—particularly through the Bushehr nuclear power plant project—could be used to advance Iran’s nuclear weapons research and development program. Beginning in January 1998, the Russian Government took a number of steps to increase its oversight of entities involved in dealings with Iran and other states of proliferation concern. In 1999, it pushed a new export control law through the Duma. Russian firms, however, faced economic pressures to circumvent these controls and did so in some cases. The Russian Government, moreover, failed to enforce its export controls in some cases regarding Iran. A component of the Russian Ministry of Atomic Energy (MINATOM) contracted with Iran to provide equipment clearly intended for Atomic Vapor Laser Isotope Separation (AVLIS). The laser equipment was to have been delivered in late 2000 but continues to be held up as a result of US protests. AVLIS technology could provide Iran the means to produce weapons quantities of highly enriched uranium. China pledged in October 1997 to halt cooperation on a uranium conversion facility (UCF) and not to engage in any new nuclear cooperation with Iran but said it would complete cooperation on two nuclear projects: a small research reactor and a zirconium production facility at Esfahan that Iran will use to produce cladding for reactor fuel. As a party to the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty (NPT), Iran is required to apply IAEA safeguards to nuclear fuel, but safeguards are not required for the zirconium plant or its products. Iran has attempted to use its civilian energy program, which is quite modest in scope, to justify its efforts to establish domestically or otherwise acquire assorted nuclear fuel-cycle capabilities. But such capabilities can also support fissile material production for a weapons program, and we believe it is this objective that drives Iran’s efforts to acquire relevant facilities. For example, Iran has sought to obtain turnkey facilities, such as the UCF, that ostensibly would be used to support fuel production for the Bushehr power plant. But the UCF could be used in any number of ways to support fissile material production needed for a nuclear weapon—specifically, production of uranium hexafluoride for use as a feedstock for uranium enrichment operations and production of uranium compounds suitable for use as fuel in a plutonium production reactor. In addition, we suspect that Tehran most likely is interested in acquiring foreign fissile material and technology for weapons development as part of its overall nuclear weapons program. During the second half of 2000, entities in Russia, North Korea, and China continued to supply crucial ballistic missile–related equipment, technology, and expertise to Iran. Tehran is using assistance from foreign suppliers and entities to support current development and production programs and to achieve its goal of becoming self-sufficient in the production of ballistic missiles. Iran already is producing Scud short-range ballistic missiles (SRBMs) and is in the late stages of developing the Shahab-3 medium-range ballistic missile (MRBM). Iran has built and publicly displayed prototypes for the Shahab-3 and has tested the Shahab-3 three times—July 1998, July 2000, and September 2000. In addition, Iran has publicly acknowledged the development of a Shahab-4, originally calling it a more capable ballistic missile than the Shahab-3 but later categorizing it as solely a space launch vehicle with no military applications. Iran’s Defense Minister also has publicly mentioned plans for a "Shahab-5". Such statements, made against the backdrop of sustained cooperation with Russian, North Korean, and Chinese entities, strongly suggest that Tehran intends to develop a longer-range ballistic missile capability. Iran continues to seek and acquire conventional weapons and production technologies primarily from Russia and China. Following Russia’s public abrogation of the 1995 Gore-Chernomyrdin Agreement in November 2000, Iran has expressed interest in acquiring a variety of Russian air, naval and ground weapons. Russia has continued to deliver on contracts signed prior to the 1995 agreement. During the second half of 2000, Iran continued to negotiate for and receive Mi-171 helicopters form Russia. Naval acquisitions from a variety of countries continue. Tehran also has been able to keep operational at least part of its existing fleet of Western-origin aircraft and helicopters supplied before the 1979 Iranian Revolution and continues to develop limited capabilities to produce armor, artillery, tactical missiles, munitions, and aircraft with foreign assistance. Iraq Since Operation Desert Fox in December 1998, Baghdad has refused to allow United Nations inspectors into Iraq as required by Security Council Resolution 687. In spite of ongoing UN efforts to establish a follow-on inspection regime comprising the UN Monitoring, Verification, and Inspection Commission (UNMOVIC) and the IAEA’s Iraq Action Team, no UN inspections occurred during this reporting period. Moreover, the automated video monitoring system installed by the UN at known and suspect WMD facilities in Iraq is no longer operating. Having lost this on-the-ground access, it is more difficult for the UN or the US to accurately assess the current state of Iraq’s WMD programs. Given Iraq’s past behavior, it is likely that Iraq has used the period since Desert Fox to reconstitute prohibited programs. We assess that since the suspension of UN inspections in December of 1998, Baghdad has had the capability to reinitiate both its CW and BW programs within a few weeks to months. Without an inspection-monitoring program, however, it is more difficult to determine if Iraq has done so. Since the Gulf war, Iraq has rebuilt key portions of its chemical production infrastructure for industrial and commercial use, as well as its missile production facilities. It has attempted to purchase numerous dual-use items for, or under the guise of, legitimate civilian use. This equipment—in principle subject to UN scrutiny—also could be diverted for WMD purposes. Since the suspension of UN inspections in December 1998, the risk of diversion has increased. After Desert Fox, Baghdad again instituted a reconstruction effort on those facilities destroyed by the US bombing, including several critical missile production complexes and former dual-use CW production facilities. In addition, Iraq appears to be installing or repairing dual-use equipment at CW-related facilities. Some of these facilities could be converted fairly quickly for production of CW agents. UNSCOM reported to the Security Council in December 1998 that Iraq also continued to withhold information related to its CW program. For example, Baghdad seized from UNSCOM inspectors an Air Force document discovered by UNSCOM that indicated that Iraq had not consumed as many CW munitions during the Iran-Iraq war in the 1980s as had been declared by Baghdad. This discrepancy indicates that Iraq may have hidden an additional 6,000 CW munitions. In 1995, Iraq admitted to having an offensive BW program and submitted the first in a series of Full, Final, and Complete Disclosures (FFCDs) that were supposed to reveal the full scope of its BW program. According to UNSCOM, these disclosures are incomplete and filled with inaccuracies. Since the full scope and nature of Iraq’s BW program was not verified, UNSCOM had assessed that Iraq continued to maintain a knowledge base and industrial infrastructure that could be used to produce quickly a large amount of BW agents at any time, if the decision is made to do so. In the absence of UNSCOM or other inspections and monitoring since late 1998, we remain concerned that Iraq may again be producing biological warfare agents. Iraq has continued working on its L-29 unmanned aerial vehicle (UAV) program, which involves converting L-29 jet trainer aircraft originally acquired from Eastern Europe. It is believed that Iraq has conducted flights of the L-29, possibly to test system improvements or to train new pilots. These refurbished trainer aircraft are believed to have been modified for delivery of chemical or, more likely, biological warfare agents. We believe that Iraq has probably continued low-level theoretical R&D associated with its nuclear program. A sufficient source of fissile material remains Iraq’s most significant obstacle to being able to produce a nuclear weapon. Although we were already concerned about a reconstituted nuclear weapons program, our concerns were increased last September when Saddam publicly exhorted his "Nuclear Mujahidin" to "defeat the enemy." Iraq continues to pursue development of SRBM systems that are not prohibited by the United Nations and may be expanding to longer-range systems. Pursuit of UN-permitted missiles continues to allow Baghdad to develop technological improvements and infrastructure that could be applied to a longer-range missile program. We believe that development of the liquid-propellant Al-Samoud SRBM probably is maturing and that a low-level operational capability could be achieved in the near term — which is further suggested by the appearance of four Al Samoud transporter-erector-launchers (TELs) with airframes at the 31 December Al Aqsa Cal parade. The solid-propellant missile development program may now be receiving a higher priority, and development of the Ababil-100 SRBM – two of such airframes and TELs were paraded on 31 December—and possibly longer range systems may be moving ahead rapidly. If economic sanctions against Iraq were lifted, Baghdad probably would increase its attempts to acquire missile-related items from foreign sources, regardless of any future UN monitoring and continuing restrictions on long-range ballistic missile programs. Iraq probably retains a small, covert force of Scud-type missiles. Iraq’s ACW acquisitions remain low due to the generally successful enforcement of the UN arms embargo. The weapons and ACW-related goods which have been delivered to Iraq tend to be smaller arms transported over porous land borders. Iraq continues, however, to aggressively seek ACW equipment and technology. North Korea During this time frame, North Korea continued procurement of raw materials and components for its ballistic missile programs from various foreign sources, especially through North Korean firms based in China. We assess that North Korea is capable of producing and delivering via munitions a wide variety of chemical and biological agents. During the remainder of 2000, P’yongyang continued its attempts to procure technology worldwide that could have applications in its nuclear program, but we do not know of any procurement directly linked to the nuclear weapons program. We assess that North Korea has produced enough plutonium for at least one, and possibly two, nuclear weapons. The United States and North Korea completed the canning of all accessible spent fuel rods and rod fragments in April 2000 in accordance with the 1994 Agreed Framework. That reactor fuel contains enough plutonium for several more weapons. Libya Libya is continuing its efforts to obtain ballistic missile–related equipment, materials, technology, and expertise from foreign sources. Outside assistance—particularly Serbian, Indian, North Korean and Chinese—is critical to it ballistic missile development programs, and the suspension of UN sanctions in 1999 has allowed Tripoli to expand its procurement effort. Libya’s current capability probably remains limited to its Scud B missiles, but with continued foreign assistance it may achieve an MRBM capability—a long-desired goal—or extended-range Scud capability. Libya remains heavily dependent on foreign suppliers for precursor chemicals and other key CW-related equipment. Following the suspension of UN sanctions in April 1999, Tripoli reestablished contacts with sources of expertise, parts, and precursor chemicals abroad, primarily in Western Europe. Libya still appears to have a goal of establishing an offensive CW capability and an indigenous production capability for weapons. Evidence suggests Libya also is seeking to acquire the capability to develop and produce BW agents. Libya—an NPT party with full scope IAEA safeguards—continues to develop its nuclear research and development program but would still require significant foreign assistance to advance a nuclear weapons option. The suspension of UN sanctions has accelerated the pace of procurement efforts in Libya’s drive to rejuvenate its ostensibly civilian nuclear program. In January and November 2000, for example, Tripoli and Moscow renewed talks on cooperation at the Tajura Nuclear Research Center and discussed a potential power reactor deal. Should such civil-sector work come to fruition, Libya could gain opportunities to pursue technologies that could be diverted for military purposes. Following the suspension of UN sanctions, Libya has negotiated—and perhaps completed—contracts with Russian firms for conventional weapons, munitions, and upgrades and refurbishment for its existing inventory of Soviet-era weapons. Syria Syria sought CW-related precursors and expertise from foreign sources during the reporting period. Damascus already has a stockpile of the nerve agent sarin, and it would appear that Syria is trying to develop more toxic and persistent nerve agents. Syria remains dependent on foreign sources for key elements of its CW program, including precursor chemicals and key production equipment. It is highly probable that Syria also is developing an offensive BW capability. We will continue to monitor the potential for Syria’s nuclear R&D program to expand. During the second half of 2000, Damascus continued work on establishing a solid-propellant rocket motor development and production capability with help from outside countries. Foreign equipment and assistance to its liquid-propellant missile program—primarily from North Korean entities, but also from firms in Russia—have been and will continue to be essential for Syria’s effort. Damascus also continued its efforts to assemble—probably with considerable North Korean assistance—liquid-fueled Scud C missiles. Syria continues to acquire ACW—mainly from Russia and other FSU suppliers—although at a reduced level from the early 1990s. During the past few years, Syria has received Kornet-E (AT-14), Metis-M (AT-13), Konkurs (AT-5), and Bastion-M (AT-10B) antitank guided missiles, RPG-29 rocket launchers, and small arms. Damascus has expressed interest in acquiring Russian Su-27 and MiG-29 fighters and air defense systems, but its outstanding debt to Moscow and inability to fund large purchases have hampered negotiations. Sudan In the WMD arena, Sudan, a CWC States Party, has been developing the capability to produce chemical weapons for many years. In this pursuit, it historically has obtained help from entities in other countries, principally Iraq. Sudan may be interested in a BW program as well. During the reporting period, Sudan sought to acquire a variety of military equipment from various sources. Khartoum is seeking older, less expensive ACW and conventional weapons that nonetheless are advanced compared with the capabilities of the weapons possessed by its opponents and their supporters in neighboring countries in the long-running civil war. India India continues its nuclear weapons development program, for which its underground nuclear tests in May 1998 were a significant milestone. The acquisition of foreign equipment will benefit New Delhi in its efforts to develop and produce more sophisticated nuclear weapons. During this reporting period, India continued to obtain foreign assistance for its civilian nuclear power program, primarily from Russia. India continues to rely on foreign assistance for key missile technologies, where it still lacks engineering or production expertise. Entities in Russia and Western Europe remained the primary conduits of missile-related and dual-use technology transfers during the latter half of 2000. India continues an across-the-board modernization of its armed forces through ACW acquisitions, mostly from Russia, although many of its key programs have been plagued by delays. During the reporting period, New Delhi concluded a $3 billion contract with Russia to produce under license 140 Su-30 multirole fighters and continued negotiations with Moscow for 310 T-90S main battle tanks, A-50 Airborne Early Warning and Control (AWACS) aircraft, Tu-22M Backfire maritime strike bombers, and an aircraft carrier. India also continues to explore options for leasing or purchasing several AWACS systems from other entities. India also signed a contract with France for 10 additional Mirage 2000H multirole fighters and is considering offers for jet trainer aircraft from France and the United Kingdom. In addition to helping India with the development of its indigenous nuclear-powered submarine, Russia is negotiating with India the possible lease of a Russian nuclear-powered attack submarine. Pakistan Chinese entities continued to provide significant assistance to Pakistan’s ballistic missile program during the reporting period. With Chinese assistance, Pakistan is moving toward serial production of solid-propellant SRBMs, such as the Shaheen-I and Haider-I. Pakistan flight-tested the Shaheen-I in 1999 and plans to flight-test the Haider-I in 2001. Successful development of the two-stage Shaheen-II MRBM will require continued Chinese assistance or assistance from other potential sources. Pakistan continued to acquire nuclear-related and dual-use equipment and materials from various sources—principally in Western Europe. Islamabad has a well-developed nuclear weapons program, as evidenced by its first nuclear weapons tests in late May 1998. Acquisition of nuclear-related goods from foreign sources will remain important if Pakistan chooses to develop more advanced nuclear weapons. China, which has provided extensive support in the past to Islamabad’s nuclear weapons and ballistic missile programs, in May 1996 pledged that it would not provide assistance to unsafeguarded nuclear facilities in any state, including Pakistan. We cannot rule out, however, some unspecified contacts between Chinese entities and entities involved in Pakistan’s nuclear weapons development. Pakistan continues to rely on China and France for its ACW requirements and negotiated to purchase an additional 40 F-7 fighters from China. Egypt During the last half of 2000, Egypt maintained a relationship with North Korea on ballistic missiles and maintained a Scud inventory. Egypt's ACW acquisition trends aim toward modernizing its Soviet-era equipment and acquiring newer, mostly US weapons. Key Suppliers: Russia Despite improvements in Russia’s economy, the state-run defense and nuclear industries remain strapped for funds, even as Moscow looks to them for badly needed foreign exchange through exports. We remain very concerned about the proliferation implications of such sales in several areas. Monitoring Russian proliferation behavior, therefore, will remain a very high priority. Russian entities during the reporting period continued to supply a variety of ballistic missile-related goods and technical know-how to countries such as Iran, India, China, and Libya. Iran’s earlier success in gaining technology and materials from Russian entities has helped to accelerate Iranian development of the Shahab-3 MRBM, and continuing Russian assistance likely supports Iranian efforts to develop new missiles and increase Tehran's self-sufficiency in missile production. Russia also remained a key supplier for civilian nuclear programs in Iran, primarily focused on the Bushehr Nuclear Power Plant project. With respect to Iran’s nuclear infrastructure, Russian assistance enhances Iran’s ability to support a nuclear weapons development effort, even though the ostensible purpose of most of this assistance is for civilian applications. Despite Iran’s NPT status, the United States is convinced Tehran is pursuing a nuclear weapons program. The Intelligence Community will be closely monitoring Tehran’s nuclear cooperation with Moscow for any direct assistance in support of a nuclear weapons program. In January 2000, Moscow approved a draft cooperative program with Syria that included civil use of nuclear power. Broader access to Russian scientists and Russia’s large nuclear infrastructure could provide opportunities to solicit fissile material production expertise and other nuclear-related assistance if Syria decided to pursue nuclear weapons. In addition, Russia supplied India with material for its civilian nuclear program during this reporting period. President Putin in May 2000 amended the presidential decree on nuclear exports to allow the export in exceptional cases of nuclear materials, technology, and equipment to countries that do not have full-scope IAEA safeguards. The move could clear the way for expanding nuclear exports to certain countries that do not have full-scope safeguards, such as India. During the second half of 2000, Russian entities remained a significant source of dual-use biotechnology, chemicals, production technology, and equipment for Iran. Russia’s biological and chemical expertise makes it an attractive target for Iranians seeking technical information and training on BW and CW agent production processes. Russia continues to be a major supplier of conventional arms. It is the primary source of ACW for China and India, it continues to supply ACW to Iran and Syria, and it has negotiated new contracts with Libya and North Korea. Russia continues to be the main supplier of technology and equipment to India and China’s naval nuclear propulsion programs. In addition, Russia has discussed leasing nuclear-powered attack submarines to India. The Russian Government’s commitment, willingness, and ability to curb proliferation-related transfers remain uncertain. The export control bureaucracy was reorganized again as part of President Putin’s broader government reorganization in May 2000. The Federal Service for Currency and Export Controls (VEK) was abolished and its functions assumed by a new department in the Ministry of Economic Development and Trade. VEK had been tasked with drafting the implementing decrees for Russia’s July 1999 export control law; the status of these decrees is not known. Export enforcement continues to need improvement. In February 2000, Sergey Ivanov, then Secretary of Russia’s Security Council, said that during 1998-99 the government had obtained convictions for unauthorized technology transfers in three cases. The Russian press has reported on cases where advanced equipment is simply described as something else in the export documentation and is exported. Enterprises sometimes falsely declare goods to avoid government taxes. North Korea Throughout the second half of 2000, North Korea continued to export significant ballistic missile–related equipment, components, materials, and technical expertise to countries in the Middle East, South Asia, and North Africa. P’yongyang attaches a high priority to the development and sale of ballistic missiles, equipment, and related technology. Exports of ballistic missiles and related technology are one of the North’s major sources of hard currency, which fuel continued missile development and production. China During this reporting period, Beijing continued to take a very narrow interpretation of its bilateral nonproliferation commitments with the United States. In the case of missile-related transfers, Beijing has on several occasions pledged not to sell Missile Technology Control Regime (MTCR) Category I systems but has not recognized the regime’s key technology annex. China is not a member of the MTCR. In November 2000, China committed not to assist, in any way, any country in the development of ballistic missiles that can be used to deliver nuclear weapons, and to enact at an early date a comprehensive missile-related export control system. During the reporting period, Chinese entities provided Pakistan with missile-related technical assistance. Pakistan has been moving toward domestic serial production of solid-propellant SRBMs with Chinese help. Pakistan also needs continued Chinese assistance to support development of the two-stage Shaheen-II MRBM. In addition, firms in China have provided dual-use missile-related items, raw materials, and/or assistance to several other countries of proliferation concern—such as Iran, North Korea, and Libya. In the nuclear area, China has made bilateral pledges to the United States that go beyond its 1992 NPT commitment not to assist any country in the acquisition or development of nuclear weapons. For example, in May 1996 Beijing pledged that it would not provide assistance to unsafeguarded nuclear facilities. With respect to Pakistan, Chinese entities in the past provided extensive support to unsafeguarded as well as safeguarded nuclear facilities, which enhanced substantially Pakistan’s nuclear weapons capability. We cannot rule out some continued contacts between Chinese entities and entities associated with Pakistan’s nuclear weapons program subsequent to Beijing’s 1996 pledge and during this reporting period. In October 1997, China gave the United States assurances regarding its nuclear cooperation with Iran. China agreed to end cooperation with Iran on supply of a uranium conversion facility and undertake no new cooperation with Iran after completion of two existing projects—a zero-power reactor and a zirconium production plant. Although the Chinese appear to have lived up to these commitments, we are aware of some interactions between Chinese and Iranian entities that have raised questions about its "no new nuclear cooperation" pledge. According to the State Department, the Administration is seeking to address these questions with appropriate Chinese authorities. Prior to the reporting period, Chinese firms had supplied dual-use CW-related production equipment and technology to Iran. The US sanctions imposed in May 1997 on seven Chinese entities for knowingly and materially contributing to Iran’s CW program remain in effect. Evidence during the current reporting period shows Iran continues to seek such assistance from Chinese entities, but it is unclear to what extent these efforts have succeeded. China is a primary supplier of advanced conventional weapons to Pakistan, Iran, and Sudan, among others. Sudan received military vehicles, naval equipment, guns, ammunition, and tanks from Chinese suppliers in the latter half of 2000. Western Countries As was the case in 1998 and 1999, entities in Western countries in 2000 were not as important as sources for WMD- and missile- related goods and materials as in past years. However, Iran and Libya continued to approach entities in Western Europe to provide needed acquisitions for their WMD and missile programs. Increasingly rigorous and effective export controls and cooperation among supplier countries have led the other foreign WMD and missile programs to look elsewhere for many controlled dual-use goods. Machine tools, spare parts for dual-use equipment, and widely available materials, scientific equipment, and specialty metals were the most common items sought. In addition, several Western countries announced their willingness to negotiate ACW sales to Libya. Trends As in previous reports, countries determined to maintain WMD and missile programs over the long term have been placing significant emphasis on increased self-sufficiency and attempts to insulate their programs against interdiction and disruption, as well as trying to reduce their dependence on imports by developing domestic production capabilities. Although these capabilities may not always be a good substitute for foreign imports—particularly for more advanced technologies—in many cases they may prove to be adequate. In addition, as their domestic capabilities grow, traditional recipients of WMD and missile technology could emerge as new suppliers of technology and expertise. Many of these countries—such as India, Iran and Pakistan—are not members of supplier groups such as the Nuclear Suppliers Group, Australia Group and the Missile Technology Control Regime and do not adhere to their export constraints. In addition, private companies, scientists, and engineers in Russia, China, and India may be increasing their involvement in WMD- and missile-related assistance, taking advantage of weak or unenforceable national export controls and the growing availability of technology. Some countries of proliferation concern are continuing efforts to develop indigenous designs for advanced conventional weapons and expand production capabilities, although most of these programs usually rely heavily on foreign technical assistance. Many of these countries—unable to obtain newer or more advanced arms—are pursuing upgrade programs for existing inventories. Reports Page CIA Homepage