Wired correspondent Sharon Weinberger has a compelling investigative piece in the New York Post about the CIA's quest for Russian helicopters to sneak into Afghanistan before the full-scale U.S. invasion. It's a tale of secrecy, corruption, Siberian cold, and credit card rewards.

Here's a bit of Weinbeger's synopsis at Wired's Danger Room:

As with many “black” programs, the contract had elements of craziness: Contracting officials paid the multimillion-dollar contract on a credit card at a local El Paso bar and then used the credit card rebate to redecorate their office; the team traveled under the guise of being private contractors; and the charter crew transporting the group abandoned the team in Russia in the middle of the night.

Ultimately, a five-year investigation into the mission led to the conviction of the Army official in charge and the contractor who bought the helicopters on charges of corruption. The two men, currently in federal prison, are appealing their convictions.

The full article is a thrilling read.

For more of Weinberger's coverage of questionable helicopter contracting, check out her April piece, "How to get a no-bid contract for Russian choppers." Turns out being a middleman in U.S.-Russian arms deals is pretty lucrative. 

When U.S. taxpayers shell out for these kinds of shenanigans, at least we're getting some entertainment value.

Above, Russian Mi-17s in 2007.

SERGEY PONOMAREV/AFP/Getty Images

Maybe it was bound to happen. The Save Darfur Coalition says its mission is "inspiring action, raising awareness and speaking truth to power on behalf of the people of Darfur."

You'll be relieved to find out that this $12.00 thong is not an official product of the Coalition, but the sales description promises that it can be used to do all of these things:

"Toss these message panties onstage at your favorite rock star or share a surprise message with someone special ... later."  

Admittedly, this description is the same for the thong regardless of which logo is chosen. But I'm still cringing.

The dealer, CafePress, gurantees that "100% of the profits will be dontated directly to the Save Darfur Coalition (www.savedarfur.org)." And the deal goes beyond just thongs. Save Darfur pet bowls and beer steins are among the other items on offer. 

Judging by some early reactions, raising funds or awareness like this might not exactly help mend divisions among Darfur activists or get policymakers to take them seriously.

In fact, even though they didn't make it, I'll be surprised if the Save Darfur Coalition doesn't distance themselves, given that they are featured as the recipient. On the other hand, if the Save Darfur Coalition's "millions of everyday citizens" all sent a thong to the White House, someone would have to pay attention. 

Annie wrote yesterday about how Bermuda and Palau's economic dependency on the United States might have something to do with their decision to accept Uighur prisoners from Guantanamo Bay. But Bermuda also has a legal dependency on Britian, and London was surprised, to say the list, by the news, and they're a bit ticked off at Washington as well:

Under a 1968 understanding known as the general entrustment, Bermuda has the right to conduct external relations "on behalf of" Britain, on condition that London is consulted before agreements with other states are entered. At issue is whether the prison transfer represented such a formal agreement, or simply a local immigration matter. The Foreign Office insisted the matter was "a security issue for which the Bermuda government does not have delegated responsibility."

British officials said there would now be talks with Bermuda on the interpretation of the general entrustment. But by this evening they were playing down a suggestion made earlier in the day that the understanding would be suspended. Meanwhile, a Foreign Office official said Britain would help Bermuda carry out a thorough security assessment of the four Chinese Muslim separatists.

Taken by surprise by news of the Uighurs arrival, Britain's foreign secretary, David Miliband, is understood to have had an uneasy telephone conversation with the US secretary of state, Hillary Clinton, about why London was not told. Clinton reportedly said the US had assumed that Bermuda had agreed the move with Britain before agreeing to host the Uighurs.

Just to connect the memes, the question of whether Bermuda's sovereignty is recognized in U.S. law was one taken up by none other than Supreme Court nominee Sonia Sotomayor, who argued in a 2000 dissent that Bermudans should be considered citizens of a foreign state, despite the fact that the State Department does not recognize the island as a sovereign nation.

No exactly relevant to this question, but interesting. 

The Olympics torch for the 2010 winter games in Vancouver is officially supposed to evoke "the cool, crisp and modern lines that are left behind in the snow and ice from winter sports." But a lot of people are saying the 37-inch white torch, with crimped ends and twist in the middle, resembles a hand-rolled marijuana joint, especially when it's lit (and viewed in the horizontal position).

It doesn't help that Vancouver is a major marijuana-producing area. The Olympic torch has now been dubbed the Olympic Toke.

Photo: © VANOC/COVAN

Here at FP, we don't always pay much attention to U.S. domestic policy, obviously, and the tax-day tea parties confused us a bit. Why weren't the protesters dressed up as Native Americans (like in the Boston Tea Party) or Mad Hatters? Weren't top-bracket taxes higher under Reagan?

Regardless, we've glommed onto a U.S. domestic issue which suggests a foreign-policy disaster: the U.S. state of Texas threatening to secede. Texas Governor Rick Perry, angered, like the tea-bag-partiers, over Obama's spending and tax policies, has implied that Texas might leave the Union.

So what would Texas look like as a foreign country?

It would be the world's thirteenth largest economy -- bigger than South Korea, Sweden, and Saudi Arabia. But its worth would crater precipitously, after NAFTA rejected it and the United States slapped it with an embargo that would make Cuba look like a free-trade zone. Indeed, Texas would quick become the next North Korea, relying on foreign aid due to its insistence on relying on itself. 

On the foreign policy front, a seceded Texas would suffer for deserting the world superpower. Obama wouldn't look kindly on secessionists, and would send in the military to tamp down rebellion. If Texas miraculously managed to hold its borders, Obama would not establish relations with the country -- though he might send a special rapporteur. (We nominate Kinky Friedman.)

So, Texas would need to court Mexico and Central American nations as a trading partners and protectors. Those very nations would also pose a host of problems for Texas. President Perry might find friends in anti-U.S. nations like Venezuela and Cuba, but their socialist politics would rankle the libertarian nation. 

And Texas would become a conduit for drugs moving north to the United States from Mexico, maybe even becoming a narco-state. It would need to invest heavily in its own military and policing force to stop drug violence within its borders -- taking away valuable resources from, oh, feeding its people, fending off U.S. border incursions, and improving its standing in the world. 

In short: the state of Texas would rapidly become direly impoverished, would need to be heavily armed, and would be wracked with existential domestic and foreign policy threats. It would probably make our failed states list in short order. Probably better to pay the damn taxes.

And of course -- Texas isn't seceding. Only regions in civil war or self-governing areas in very weak states manage independence. Perry was floating a piece of asinine political rhetoric, running a heated race against fellow Republican Kay Bailey Hutchinson and courting small-government conservatives of all stripes. Plus, more importantly, Texas can't secede, according to the 1869 Supreme Court Case, Texas v. White. Ah well. 

IMPORTANT UPDATE:  Chuck Norris has offered to be President of Texas, greatly reducing the possible internal threat of unionists or external threat of U.S. military forces to the seceded country. (H/t Ezra Klein.) 

Photo: Flickr user Susan E. Gray

Writing in the Washington Times, Audrey Hudson and Eli Lake report that the Department of Homeland Security has produced and disseminated a nine-page report on the threat of "rightwing extremist activity," spurred by the global economic crisis, election of a black president, and the return of "disgruntled war veterans."

The nine-page document was sent to police and sheriff's departments across the United States on April 7 under the headline, "Rightwing Extremism: Current Economic and Political Climate Fueling Resurgence in Radicalization and Recruitment."

It says the federal government "will be working with its state and local partners over the next several months" to gather information on "rightwing extremist activity in the United States"....

"Most statements by rightwing extremists have been rhetorical, expressing concerns about the election of the first African American president, but stopping short of calls for violent action," the report says. "In two instances in the run-up to the election, extremists appeared to be in the early planning stages of some threatening activity targeting the Democratic nominee, but law enforcement interceded." 

In producing the report, the United States joins numerous European countries facing possible right-wing nationalist activity. But Europe's long-struggled with nationalism stoked by immigration from ethnic minorities; it has right-wing anti-immigration political parties, mainstreaming sentiment which might otherwise be considered or become extremist.

In Great Britain, the Labour Party has worried that the British National Party, which condemns "non-white immigration," may win a Parliamenary seat. So have parties in Austria and Turkey.

The Hill reports that in 2007 Cuba poisoned the pet animals of U.S. diplomats working in the country:

The 64-page report written in 2007 states that the life of U.S. diplomats serving in the U.S. Interest Section (USINT) - which issues visas and performs other diplomatic services in Havana - was laden with poor morale "in part because USINT life in Havana is life with a government that ‘let's [sic] you know it's hostile'"....

"Retaliations have ranged from the petty to the poisoning of family pets. The regime has recently gone to great lengths to harass some employees by holding up household goods and consumable shipments. The apparent goal has been to instigate dissension within USINT ranks."  

The report comes just as the Obama administration is attempting to strengthen relations and ease strictures on the Communist country. Which begs the question: who decided it release it now?

In the upcoming issue of The Atlantic, Simon Johnson -- M.I.T. professor, awesome financial-collapse blogger, and former chief economist for the I.M.F. -- has a must-read. The nutgraf(s):

In its depth and suddenness, the U.S. economic and financial crisis is shockingly reminiscent of moments we have recently seen in emerging markets (and only in emerging markets): South Korea (1997), Malaysia (1998), Russia and Argentina (time and again). In each of those cases, global investors, afraid that the country or its financial sector wouldn’t be able to pay off mountainous debt, suddenly stopped lending. And in each case, that fear became self-fulfilling, as banks that couldn’t roll over their debt did, in fact, become unable to pay. This is precisely what drove Lehman Brothers into bankruptcy on September 15, causing all sources of funding to the U.S. financial sector to dry up overnight. Just as in emerging-market crises, the weakness in the banking system has quickly rippled out into the rest of the economy, causing a severe economic contraction and hardship for millions of people.

But there’s a deeper and more disturbing similarity: elite business interests—financiers, in the case of the U.S.—played a central role in creating the crisis, making ever-larger gambles, with the implicit backing of the government, until the inevitable collapse. More alarming, they are now using their influence to prevent precisely the sorts of reforms that are needed, and fast, to pull the economy out of its nosedive. The government seems helpless, or unwilling, to act against them.

Johnson shows how financial firms became more and more profitable, and a bigger and bigger part of the U.S. economy. More capital meant more political capital, he argues, which eventually meant nobody prevented the melt-down. The same political entrenchment makes fixing the banks difficult. 

The obvious solution to the financial crisis, Johnson says -- informed by his time at the I.M.F. -- is simple. The United States should determine which banks can't survive and temporarily nationalize them, instead of simply recapitalizing them, he says. But the relationship between top financiers and the government means this won't happen -- at least not unless things get much worse.

Still, his article includes a list of the policies (or lack thereof) which most contributed to the bubble and burst. It's a great crib sheet of what Capitol Hill and the G-20 Summit will tackle, piece by piece, to reform the system. 

• insistence on free movement of capital across borders;

• the repeal of Depression-era regulations separating commercial and investment banking;

• a congressional ban on the regulation of credit-default swaps;

• major increases in the amount of leverage allowed to investment banks;

• a light (dare I say invisible?) hand at the Securities and Exchange Commission in its regulatory enforcement;

• an international agreement to allow banks to measure their own riskiness;

• and an intentional failure to update regulations so as to keep up with the tremendous pace of financial innovation.

It's fascinating, scary reading. 

This is disturbing to say the least:

Canada's science minister, the man at the centre of the controversy over federal funding cuts to researchers, won't say if he believes in evolution.

“I'm not going to answer that question. I am a Christian, and I don't think anybody asking a question about my religion is appropriate,” Gary Goodyear, the federal Minister of State for Science and Technology, said in an interview with The Globe and Mail.

A funding crunch, exacerbated by cuts in the January budget, has left many senior researchers across the county scrambling to find the money to continue their experiments.

Some have expressed concern that Mr. Goodyear, a chiropractor from Cambridge, Ont., is suspicious of science, perhaps because he is a creationist.

When asked about those rumours, Mr. Goodyear said such conversations are not worth having.

George W. Bush caught a lot of (understandable) flack from scientists for his partial embrace of "intelligent design" education, but even he chose a science advisor who stated clearly that "evolution is the cornerstone of modern biology."

(Hat tip: Boing Boing)

Last night, NBC late-night comedian Jay Leno -- hosting U.S. President Barack Obama this week -- riffed extensively on the international implications of the increasingly catastrophic AIG bailout during his monologue:

[The AIG executives] bankrupt the company, took $170 billion of our dollars and they're giving out bonuses. You know the main thing they want to reward their people for? Convincing the Treasury Department to give $170 billion dollars to a failing company, so they can give out bonuses for a job well done. You know what "AIG" stands for -- anybody know? Adventures in Greed.

They don't have to account for any of us. Now it turns out they gave $35 billion -- not million, $35 billion -- of our money to bail out European banks. See, this is how a global economy works. Our hard-earned tax dollars are used to bail out German banks for making bad investments in American companies that shut down because the Japanese owners moved the whole thing to India, China, and Mexico. Boy, you thought St. Patrick drove the snakes out of Ireland? Let's send him down to Wall Street!

Turns out, Leno's right. This week, AIG released a document listing the "financial counterparties" who received $101 billion directly from the U.S. government's "emergency loan." AIG used more than of half the Treasury funds to pay down money owed for things like credit default swaps -- most of which went to foreign companies' coffers. Using data BusinessWeek broke down, we made the above chart.  

Funny how the comedians are besting the finance experts now, huh?

As Antiguan voters headed to the polls today, the main topic of debate was who, exactly, let billionaire financier and alleged Ponzi-scheme operator Allen Stanford become the driving force behind the country's economy:

The billionaire is one of the island's most prominent citizens and its largest private employer. Hundreds of people work for his two restaurants, one newspaper, cricket grounds, a development company and a three-branch local bank as well as the headquarters of his Stanford International Bank.

Prime Minister Baldwin Spencer, whose United Progressive Party is seeking to retain its majority of 17 parliamentary seats, has said his opponents sought to "literally give away Antigua and Barbuda to Allen Stanford" when the financier brought his offshore bank here from Montserrat in 1990.

Spencer's opponent, Lester Bird, a close Stanford ally, denies the claim — although his Antigua Labor Party was in power at the time.

Tom Shaw/Getty Images

Cato's Daniel Griswold catches an interesting provision in the omnibus appropriations bill passed by the house:

Buried in the $410 billion catch-all appropriations bill now before the U.S. Senate is a provision that would end a program that has allowed Mexican truck drivers to deliver goods to destinations inside the United States....

Under current restrictions, goods coming into the United States from Mexico by truck must be unloaded inside the “commercial zone” within 20 miles or so of either side of the border and transferred to U.S.-owned trucks for final delivery. U.S. goods going to Mexico face the same inefficient and unnecessary restrictions.

The Bush administration established a pilot program that allows certain Mexican trucking companies that meet U.S. safety and other standards to deliver goods directly to U.S. destinations, while the Mexican government has agreed to allow reciprocal access to its market. But the Democratic Congress and the new Democratic president have vowed to finally kill the program, and the provision inside the appropriations bill will probably deliver the final blow.

So much for being "very careful about any signals of protectionism." Maybe that only applies to Canada.

(Hat tip: Hit & Run)

Attention D.C. residents: You know that bamboo plant livening up your office? It's needed for panda food.

The National Zoo has run critically low on bamboo and might run out before the winter ends. The zoo harvests bamboo on its premises and at other locations in the area, but for unknown reasons, the stands aren't regrowing normally.

On Jan. 14, the zoo issued a public appeal for bamboo donations for Tian Tian, Mei Xiang, Tai Shan, who munch through 1,400 pounds (635 kg) of the crunchy stalks weekly.

The three furry balls of cuteness are on loan from China. Let's hope this bamboo shortage doesn't adversely affect U.S.-China relations. Fortunately, there are some promising signs: The zoo has received many offers since issuing its appeal. However, for the bamboo to be accepted, it must meet specific criteria:

• Cover at least an acre
• Be within 25 to 30 miles from the zoo
• Grow at least 100 feet from roads
• Be free of herbicides and pesticides

By the way, check out the panda cam.

KAREN BLEIER/AFP/Getty Images

Today, the last publicly viewable statue of fascist Spanish dictator Francisco Franco on the European continent was taken down in the city of Santander:

To commemorate this occasion, here's a look at some other notable statue-topplings:

Nov. 2, 1956: Residents of Budapest, Hungary, destroy a statue of Stalin during a demonstration against communist domination. The statue had been toppled Oct. 23, 1956, at 9:30 p.m.

Aug. 22, 1991: A crowd watches the statue of Felix Dzerzhinsky, founder of the Cheka (a predecessor of the KGB), being toppled in Moscow.

Aug. 23, 1991: The statue of Lenin is dismantled in the Lithuanian capital of Vilnius as the government banned the Communist Party. Lithuania was annexed by the Soviet Union in 1940 and declared its independence in 1990.

April 9, 2003: Iraqis watch a statue of former Iraqi President Saddam Hussein falling in Baghdad. Before it fell, a U.S. marine had briefly covered its head with an American flag. The impression it conveyed of conquest rather than liberation prompted the U.S. military to bar display of the U.S. flag in most circumstances.

Nov. 23, 2003: Protesters topple a papier-mâché statue of U.S. President George W. Bush in central London. They were demonstrating against the state visit of Bush to Britain and the war in Iraq.

Oct. 13, 2007: A man jumps on a statue of former Mexican President Vicente Fox in Boca del Rio. The statue, which was going to be unveiled the next day, was knocked down by a group of unidentified people.

Photos: RAFA RIVAS/AFP/Getty Images, AFP/Getty Images, ANATOLY SAPRONENKOV/AFP/Getty Images, WOJTEK DRUSZCZ/AFP/Getty Images, PATRICK BAZ/AFP/Getty Images, EVA-LOTTA JANSSON/AFP/Getty Images, SAUL RAMIREZ/AFP/Getty Images