Microsoft is to the OS Market, as Afghanistan...

is to the Opium Market.

"We're going to show Mullah Gates a thing or two about market domination."

- Haji Bashir Noorzai, Afghan Drug Lord

According to the NY Times, Afghanistan increased its share of the opium market from 92% in 2006 to a current 93% so far in 2007.

"With increased bribery, slave labor and old fashioned intimidation tactics, we can get that number up to 95% by the end of 2008," boasted heroin kingpin Haji Baz Mohammed, "and up to 105% by 2011." When told that it was impossible to have more than 100% of any market share, Mohammed responded, "with the grace of Allah, anything is possible." Allah could not be reached for comment.

For years, Afghanistan has produced more opium than all other nations combined, so the 93% market share is actually not much more than their share in the mid 90's (when they had 80-85% share). But to put their production in perspective, Afghanistan produced 4,600 tons of opium in 1998 compared with the estimated 9,000 tons in 2007 (according to the NYT article linked above).

More highlights from the NYT article:

• "The report is likely to spark renewed debate over an American-backed proposal for the aerial spraying of opium crops with herbicide. Afghan and British officials have opposed aerial spraying, saying it would increase support for the Taliban among farmers who fear the herbicide would poison them and their families."
• "The report notes that no large increase in world demand for opium has occurred in recent years and that supply from Afghanistan “exceeds global demand by an enormous margin.” It said up to 3,300 tons of opium was being stockpiled in Afghanistan.

  Terrorist groups could be stockpiling the drug, the report warned. “Opium stockpiles, a notorious store of value, could once again be used to fund international terrorism,” it said."
  

Regarding the first point, I don't see why increasing support for the Taliban amongst farmers is an issue here. Farmers don't support the Taliban because they have a new national health plan and want to reduce government spending. They support the Taliban because AK-47's pointed at their families are pretty persuasive.

"Farmer support of the Taliban" isn't a real issue; it is a symptom of a more obvious issue - the existence of the Taliban. As long as they have power, they will have the "support" of those they can intimidate. If the postulation about the "opium bank" is true... it looks like they'll be in business for a long time.

Whatcha gonna do with all that junk?

Some time ago, I heard a song on the radio. A girl was singing a song about her humps, and her bumps, and her lumps. It struck me as very rudimentary rap; the kind of rap from the early 80's. You know, the kind where every song starts with "Well my name is Coovo and I'm here to say..."

I don't listen to the radio a lot, so I didn't know if this was a really old rap, or a new rap that was kind of a joke, or a new rap that was seriously supposed to be regarded as a good song. I thought the last option was the least likely.

Then I saw the video on You Tube, and as far as I can tell, they're dead serious about her humps.

I only found the video because someone sent me a link to a video Alannis Morrisette did mocking the original. I've never been a real fan of Alannis, but she apparently has a great sense of humor. You should probably watch the aforementioned original video linked above before watching this.



And of course, by law I don't think you can write anything like this without at least mentioning "Weird Al" once. What do you get when you combine Weird Al with Japanese humor?

Rrrr!! Where be me keyboard? Rrrrr....

Literature for a post-9/11 World

Here at The Loop and The Lou, we keep things on the lighter side. We'd like to talk more politics and religion, but our audience loves puff pieces. "Coovo's trip to the Zoo" and "Roller's Dirty Diaper Nightmare" have garnered much higher ratings than clunkers like "Coovo's trip to the Senate" and "Roller's Dirty Election Nightmare."

So at the risk of alienating some fans, I'm going to take the opportunity give a quick review of some books that I've read related to 9/11, the CIA, al Qaeda, etc. I've become pretty enthralled with this subject matter, and I'd like to spread the word.

While any of these books can be read on its own, and I recommend them all, I'd push for Ghost Wars or The Looming Tower first. They are so comprehensive, and reading them will provide excellent context for the others. Also, I highly recommend listening to the books. I read Ghost Wars and See No Evil first, and then listened to the rest. If you're a slow reader like me, it helps to digest all this content.

The following 4 books are delivered like documentaries, which is to say they remain objective and the stories they tell are all backed with facts (interviews, declassified government documents, etc.). Although that style sounds pretty dry, the subject matter definitely held my attention. I liken these books to a Tom Clancy novel without bad dialog or a romantic sub-plot.

"Ghost Wars" - This book provides a comprehensive history of the intelligence and military players in Afghanistan from 1979 (invasion of the Soviets) through 9/11. You learn how the intelligence agencies of the USA, Soviet Union, Pakistan and Saudi Arabia, along with various regional Afghan warlords played their roles in the fight against Soviet occupation, subsequent skirmish for power and the rise of the Taliban and their symbiosis with al Qaeda.

"The Looming Tower" - This book has some overlap with Ghost Wars, but differs in that it does not focus on Afghanistan, but instead the history of al Qaeda. The book introduces one of the main voices of 20th century fundamentalism (Sayyid Qutb), how he influenced Ayman al-Zawahiri (al Qaeda's no. 2) and, of course, the rise of bin Laden and the al Qaeda organization.

While their paths differ before 1995 or so, both Ghost Wars and The Looming Tower provide an excellent account of the al Qaeda network, terrorist activities leading up to 9/11 (WTC bombing in '93, the US Embassy bombings in Kenya and Tanzania and the bombing of the USS Cole off teh coast of Yemen), the planning and execution of 9/11, and what the U.S. knew and did in an effort to neutralize al Qaeda pre-9/11.

"9/11 Commission Report" - This also had some overlap with Ghost Wars and The Looming Tower, but I felt it filled in some of the blanks from the U.S. side; it had a more detailed account of the interactivity (or lackthereof) between various U.S. agencies (CIA, FBI, State Department etc.). It also opened with a minute-by-minute account of the morning of 9/11, including everything that is known to have happened on each plane. I felt this was a balanced, objective report - its criticisms were justified, but I didn't detect any taint.

"No True Glory" - The book includes the invasion in '03 in its intro, but focuses on the battles in Falluja, Iraq, a Sunni town filled with former Baathists, fundamentalist clerics, Sunni insurgents, and your plain ole' run-o-the-mill criminals. Perhaps the biggest problem with the Coalition's approach to Falluja was that they expected residents in Fallujah to welcome troops; after all the troops were there to liberate and protect them. In contrast, residents wanted no foreign presence in their city. Fallujans that were not allied with the insurgents knew that one day the foreign troops would leave, whereas the insurgents lived there and wouldn't forget anyone who even wavered on their support. The book also described the complexities of "instilling freedom" in a country with politics so closely tied to, and yet so fiercely divided by, religion.

The book was filled with the play-by-play of the battles. At first I didn't understand how this was possible, but if you see soldiers in their gear today, they're all wearing microphones as part of their communications. Every minute on the battlefield is recorded, and the stories are about as real as you can imagine. There are no words for the mental and physical toughness of these soldiers. I get a fever and I call in sick for work. These guys get shot and refuse to leave the battlefield.

The following 3 books are told as first-person, first-hand accounts.

"See No Evil" - The autobiography of ex-CIA operative Robert Baer. Although he retired in 1997, he spent years in some of the most hostile, anti-Western places in the world, including Lebanon, Sudan, Tajikistan and Iraq. Baer's career has about 5 Hollywood films worth of material; in fact it was noted that his career was the inspiration for George Clooney's character in Syriana.

"Jawbreaker - The Attack on bin Laden and al Qaeda" - CIA operative Gary Bernsten was the top CIA field commander of the ground assault in Afghanistan post-9/11. This book details the overtake of Afghanistan, from the entry in the Panshir Valley to the chase of bin Laden into the Tora Bora mountains. American military might easily crushed the Taliban, but in the end the most wanted man slipped away as some Afghan commanders' loyalties were up for bidding, and the U.S. wasn't prepared to finish the fight in the mountains. A very captivating book.

"Inside the Jihad" - I've only started this book, but it already has me hooked. This is the auto-biography of a Morrocan Muslim who ended up working for French and British intelligence as a spy. He was initially running guns for extremists in Belgium when he realized the savagery of the fanatics he was supporting. After going undercover, he actually went to al Qaeda training camps in Afghanistan.


There are numerous challenges with bringing democracy to a nation in which autocracy/theocracy is woven into the fabric of the culture. Democracy is freedom of choice, a fair chance for all. It is impossible to play by "fair" rules when the opponents play by no rules at all. The U.S. and its allies are berated globally for any appearance of heavy-handed tactics, yet it is the insurgents that resort to the blind killing of innocents, cloaked in religious divinity. It is not only that the fundamentalists believe killing "infidels" is just; they actually believe it to be their duty - and that those who do not fulfill this duty are infidels themselves.

The long-term success of democratic governments in Afghanistan and Iraq is, in my opinion, doubtful. These governments will be viewed by many Muslims as puppets of the West, no more loved than the theocratic alternative. As in Fallujah, one day western troops will leave. The insurgents will not. Camps can be leveled, cities can be cleaned, but the supply of poor, uneducated, impressionable Muslim youth is virtually endless.

Job opportunity and traditional education in many Arab nations scarce, but room and board at religious schools (madrassas), funded by fundamentalist sheiks, is not. Students in these schools are indoctrinated with fundamentalism and hatred of the West, and when they leave they are no more trained for a traditional career than when they entered. But they are mentally prepared for the jobs waiting for them on the front lines of the jihad. The strength of fundamentalist militias may ebb and flow, but it will not die, and from what I've read it's as strong now as it's been since pre-9/11.

I want to make it clear that I am not suggesting U.S. troops be pulled out. I have the luxury of spouting my opinions and predictions 6000 miles from the truth, and reading a few books hardly makes my opinion worth anything. I can only hope that those with the true knowledge of the all the variables and causes and effects of these situations can make the best, most pure decisions.


Well, what began as a book review got a little out of hand. You might say it was a little ... extreme (scary music). I'd love to hear people's thoughts on this. Heck, I just hope someone read this far. And of course I'd love to hear any books that have been enjoyed by our sleeper cell of readers. Until then, Allah ak bu ahkd ba du (Dude, yeah, Allah an all them).

Dia de Freedom

Let the words flow over you like buttery syrup on freshly griddled pancakes:

So you want to get down on the third of July?
You might not even understand why
Take a look around you and you’ll find out
Hangin’ out with good friends is what it’s all about
So come on everybody and raise those glasses high

Let’s give thanks to the family LaBarge
For letting us destroy their really nice yard
It’ll grow back or we’ll re-seed
This party has everything you’ll ever need
Except for Auggie, but he lives really far

So you want to get down on the third of July?
You might not even understand why
Take a look around you and you’ll find out
Hangin’ out with good friends is what it’s all about
So come on everybody and raise those glasses high

There’s lots of other parties on this great holiday
Some have air shows and maybe a parade
But we have fun and we’re really cool
Later on, we’ll be naked in the neighbor’s pool
That’s how we do it, (pause) God bless the USA

So you want to get down on the third of July?
You might not even understand why
Take a look around you and you’ll find out
Hangin’ out with good friends is what it’s all about
So come on everybody and raise those glasses high

We’ve been here for years and there’ll be many more
And every time you come we’ll have something new in store
‘Cause we got beer, and we got chicks
Last time I checked, that’s a really good mix
So dive right in, (pause) what are you waiting for?

So you want to get down on the third of July?
You might not even understand why
Take a look around you and you’ll find out
Hangin’ out with good friends is what it’s all about
So come on everybody and raise those glasses high

Happy Birthday America!

Hall of Shame

Howdy, folks. Roller here. McFly recently offered a solid suggestion that we diversify our content. While we still have 47 more Law & Order pieces to do and an approaching deadline for our "T.L.A.T.L.: Behind the Blog" reality show pitch, it wouldn't hurt to flex a different part of our brains. And since we're on the topic of flexing...

This post's topic is nothing original. Hence, the incredibly overused title. But I wavered on this subject for quite some time before finally coming to my own conclusion, and I think it merits a post. The topic: Should Mark McGwire and Sammy Sosa be elected into the Major League Baseball Hall of Fame?

I asked Coovo if he'd join me on this one, L&O style, and he suggested that we write the post in more of a conversational manner. I agreed, under the condition that I can write as him half the time, and vice versa. He agreed. Or maybe I agreed while perpetrating Coovo.

In any event, I think (hope) the best part will be the comments we get from the handful of loyal readers we are lucky enough to have, all of whom are avid and knowledgeable fans of the Pastime. Play Ball...


Roller: So, we have "the men who saved baseball" at or near the end of their careers, after having piled up power numbers that would make even Josh Gibson raise an eyebrow. In the late 90's, their at-bats put conversations on pause. Fans would linger in a 14-1 stinker just to see their last AB in the 8th or 9th inning (and on the flip side, promptly leave immediately afterward even during a good game). There's no doubt in my mind that I was caught up in it, and I cannot remember giving any concern to performance enhancers at the time. I remember the andro escapade in '98, but felt that McGwire was vindicated in '99 when he said he stopped using it and still hit 65 HRs.


Coovo: If we're going to go into this together, you're going have to stop using big words like "perpetrating", and start using words I can understand, like anabolic steriod or human growth hormone. I talked a little bit about this with a post back in March entitled Pump up the Volume, but the issue here is just about Sosa and McGwire.

I was naive. I just thought that all athletes were tested for steroids. That is why I watched that crazy '98 season with as much excitement as anybody else. I was even at the game where McGwire hit no. 62. I am ashamed as a Cub fan but I clapped for McGwire. Looking back on it now, we are left with nothing but specualtion. I would say that we are left with the words of these men, like when they testified in front of Congress, but too many times in the current sports world we athletes in front of Matt Lauer repenting for their sins.

So Roller. For the sake of argument. As of now, there is no "smoking gun proof", neither player has ever been suspended (for steroids, Sosa had some bad lumber once), and they each have over 580 Home runs. Why wouldn't you vote for them?


Roller: That's a good question. Let's start with this: I think it's obvious that if it was indisputable that neither of them used performance enhancers, and they still put up those numbers, this wouldn't even be a debate. Their first-ballot status would be about as sure a bet as one could make in baseball.

But that's far from the case. So I'll turn it back to you. Do you feel that you'd need proof that they used in order to bar their legendary careers from HOF glory? And when I say proof, I mean more than, you know, Jose Canseco's "The Needle, The Ass, and Biceps of Brass".


Coovo: I'll have to see photos of all of these players' behinds before I can make a judgement. To me, it is Sosa that is the inriguing vote.

We have Canseco's allegations against McGwire, but we also have McGwire not denying he used steroids in front of Congress. That is what is keeping him out of the Hall now, not Canseco. After McGwire went, Sosa denied ever taking them. Then Rafeal Palmerio did as well. Whoops. Sosa sits there literally sandwiched between two "users". Then you look at the evidence against Bonds. Pretty convincing. So of the three players to pass Maris, two have solid circumstantial evidence against them, and again Sosa is along for the ride.

Other than refusing to pee in a cup when asked to out of the blue by a reporter, Sosa's more guilty by association. I believe he was on something, but the proof is less clear than McGwire.


Roller: "Whoops." Nice. I agree with you, although he was never caught using steroids, McGwire's almost tearful refusal to "talk about the past" paints a guilty portrait. And Sosa has never been caught, and has denied using. On the surface, one does look a little guiltier than the other.

Now that I'm done with an objective response, I have to throw in what I believe. Not based on facts, but my gut (and admittedly somewhat biased by my allegiance to a certain ballclub for which McGwire played). I can't help it, I just love those Athletics.

I believe McGwire to be a good person. After signing his first contract with the Cards, he started giving $1 million / year to his foundation for abused children (again just about crying when announcing it). The guy is a softie. I believe he is a good person who made a very, very bad decision. And he knows it. And he feels guilty now. I am in know way suggesting that his good deeds exonerate his (alleged) steroid use, but I believe his conscience won't let him deny using them.

I can't say I've seen those qualities in Sammy. Of course, my opinion of Sosa's character is worth about as much as he can throw me (mixed metaphors rule!). But here are some items that helped formulate my opinion on Sammy:

• Sammy can speak fluent English. He speaks it incredibly well in most interviews. Yet anytime he gets in a little trouble (the steroid proceedings, the corked bat), he puts on his immigrant smile and plays the "No espeaka de english" card.


• Like McGwire, Sammy also started a charity organization. His was based in his home country, the Dominican Republic. Now, I heard this so long ago that I can't say if it was on CNN or A Current Affair, but I remember hearing that the charity hadn't received a good chunk of promised money from Sammy, and that Sammy's relatives were driving new cars bought in the charity's name.

You can feel free to tell me to go to hell on these points, because they're not much. And I'd love to hear stories of Sammy rescuing a blind person's HIV-infected kitten from a burning tree. But the guy just seems a little shady to me.

So to sum up this long winded response, I guess I just feel that you have two people who are guilty. One just has a heavier conscience than the other.

Coovo?..... You awake?.....


Coovo: Barely. I've had more intersting reads while presuing the Better Home & Gardens Igloo edition.

I don't disagree with you about Sosa the person, but if being a good guy were criteria for the Hall of Fame, then we'd have to have a recount. The Hall of Fame vote is based on what one does on the field, not with his charity organizations. Unless of course he wagered on what happened on the field.

I have no doubt that now McGwire thinks what he did was wrong. He's probably very regretful. He probably won't let his son do steroids until college. Sorry, I couldn't resist. Who knows what Sammy is (other than being "berry berry good at baseball)? Although I do need to hear some of those "fluent English" interviews. If McGwire did roids a few years in Oakland. Well, that's one thing. But if he used all the way through his 70 home run season, that's another.

Roller: I suppose we'll only know if McGwire tells us (which I have a feeling he will at some point) or if Jimmy Ballgame writes a book about sticking needles in Mac's pimpled arse. I don't think McGwire's size diminished at all when he donned The Birds on The Bat - he actually seemed to be bigger than ever - so I'm guessing that he used during the 1998 season. Honestly, if he only used a few years in Oakland and hit a clean 70 HRs, what the hell is he crying about?

"The Hall of Fame vote is based on what one does on the field, not with his charity organizations." True, at least that's how it's been done in the past. We can save the "Would you vote Ty Cobb into the HOF?" debate for a breather in the "Growing Pains and Wonder Years" mini-series we've got queued up for the Fall.

But my point wasn't really that Sosa should be held from the Hall because he's not a Saint. I was just pointing to traits that, like the "bad lumber" incident, make me inclined to believe he's OK with cheating.

So, we've danced around the answer enough. Point Blank: Given what evidence exists right now, would you vote for either McGwire or Sosa? I'll even say Sosa plays till the end of 2008 and finishes with 625.


Coovo: You're a point blank. A Grosse Point Blank to be exact.

The whole MLB process in my mind has lost credibility with this issue, and that includes the Hall of Fame. I hate the cop-out, "it wasn't against baseball's rules." Everyone has known steroids were wrong since Ben Johnson lost his gold medal in the 1988 Seoul Olympics. But even after this event, 10 years before the home run chase, all of baseball--Owners, the Union, the Commisioners office--still ignored the issue. Now, a dark cloud sits over the whole game. And that cloud includes the Hall of Fame and nothing short of a rigged up Delorean time machine will remove this cloud.

I vote yes to both players. In the end, MLB should share as much blame as the players. And we can't penalize MLB. Only the players will know whether the plaque on the wall is a fraud and they'll have to live with it.

Roller: I can see your point. It's like that Van Halen song where they're like "I see both sides now". I think it's that one. Either that one or "Why Can't This Be Love?" Cause I'll be damned if I get hung out on the line!

Is MLB to blame? Without a doubt. But the players made their own choices; acted under their own will. What bothers me the most is that Sosa and McGwire were incredibly talented players. We all know McGwire hit 49 HR in his rookie year. Speed was as much a part of Sosa's game as power before his legs got so big that running was a fire hazard. We'll never know exactly what kind of numbers they would have put up. That irritates me.

If you hadn't guessed by now, I vote no to both players. I think a "yes" is essentially saying "it's too late now" to right the ship. Baseball has made many a mistake in the past, but that's no excuse to continue.

Well, there you have it. A split decision. We leave with the actual conversation from the pitcure above.

S: Hey Big Mac! You da man!

M: Hey Sammy. Nice walk.

S: The ump make good calls. He was berry berry good to me. You da man!

M: I know. Your arms are massive dude. Whatcha ya bench?

S: I eat horse pill, my arms double in size, I hit da homer. You da man!

M: Damn right. You wanna do some andro after the game?

S: Only if it make my neck turn into leather like you! You da man!

The Greatest Beer Ever

I have tasted many an alcoholic beverage in my lifetime. There are numerous I consider to be excellent beers. Guiness. Samuel Adams Boston Lager. Sierra Nevada Pale Ale.

Then I found La Fin Du Monde. Brewed by Unibroue, out of Chambly, Quebec, "The End of the World" is named in honor of the explorers who "discovered" America, which they believed to be the end of the world.

I can go so far as to say that it tastes similar to a Belgian beer. It's color is golden, but not clear, which in my mind reflects its full bodied flavor. I'm not a beer genius, so that's about as best as I can describe it. You'll just have to savor one yourself.

Of course, the greatest beer in the world isn't cheap. I found it at Trader Joe's which has pretty reasonable prices for its superb selection of brews. This beer is sold in 4-packs, to the tune of $8.99 each. With tax that's about $2.50 a beer.

But I rationalize the luxury by the following:

• A 9% alcohol by volume content means you drink less. 2 Monde's will leave you feeling just right.
  
• There were times in my life where I routinely dropped $40 on drinks in one night. $5 in one night makes me feel like I'm saving money.

I do suggest that you pour it in a pint glass. I can't say why, but it just tastes better that way.

Enough of my rambling. At this point you'll just have to treat yourself. I hope we can share a couple in the near future.

One last item - I'd like to hear what everyone else's favorite beer is, and what your opinion of La Fin du Monde is when/if you've tried it.