In what looks to be its next move in the high stakes chess match against the United States, Iran is to purchase 250 Sukhoi-30 long-range fighter jets from Russia as part of a massive multi-billion dollar arms deal. Additionally, Iran will acquire several aerial fuel tankers that will effectively extend the range of the Sukhoi-30 fighters by thousands of kilometers — giving Iran the capability to launch long-range offensive strikes.

The Sukhoi-30 is a dual seat, multi-role fighter jet that has the ability to operate in poor weather conditions at great distances from home base. It has extensive combat capabilities including air patrol, air defense, ground attacks, enemy air defense suppression and air-to-air combat.

While the U.S. and Israel have voiced opposition to Russia against the sale of military equipment to Iran, Russia contends that it reserves the right to sell weapons to Iran provided they are of a defensive nature. A more likely motive than Iranian self-defense capability is no doubt the billions of dollars Iran will pay to Russia.

This move has the potential to severely complicate things for Dick Cheney and Co. who are hellbent on bombing Iran. In addition, it serves to highlight the continual souring of camaraderie between the U.S. and Russia, which all stems back to Bush’s plan to put a missile defense system in Eastern Europe. But I think the biggest thing we can get from this is the understanding that any conflict with Iran will be brutal and horrific, and that we must do whatever is necessary to ensure an armed conflict does not occur.

The founders of ConnectU, who attended Harvard University concurrently with Mark Zuckerberg, the founder of Facebook, have filed a lawsuit in federal district court in Boston claiming fraud and copyright infringement on the part of Zuckerberg. They contend that Zuckerberg, who agreed to write some code for their site, never finished coding and subsequently launched Facebook, which at the time of this writing has over 31 million users.

Although attorneys for Facebook are arguing that the founders of ConnectU have no evidence and the case should be dismissed, ConnectU is moving forward with the case in hopes of attaining a court order to shut down the site, hand over control and pay company profits.

A hearing on the motion set forth by Facebook attorneys to dismiss is set for tomorrow.

OK, setting the ludicrous nature of this case aside, the burning question to the ConnectU founders has got to be: why on Earth did you wait so long? I’m not sure of the exact date that Facebook launched, but I know that my university got it in November 2004, and that it was already a big success before that time at scores of universities around the United States. So why wait 3-4+ years and sue, when Facebook has gathered tens of millions of users and it would be much more difficult to win?

Now that the timing issue has been addressed, let’s consider the evidence issue. If the Facebook attorneys are right that ConnectU has no proof, then this case will most likely get dismissed tomorrow at the hearing. But, if they can show some evidence to the judge that can create some sort of “reasonable doubt” for lack of a better term, this thing could possibly go to trial.

Assuming — and this is a big assumption as if it got this far Facebook would look to settle with a monetary value — this case went to trial, my guess is that Facebook has the better change of winning, but there would be an outside shot for ConnectU. And how awesome would that be if ConnectU could actually prove what they’re claiming against Zuckerberg. I for one would certainly pull for them against Facebook. Anyone sitting on a Web site getting buyout offers worth hundreds of millions of dollars, but holding out for $2 billion is greedy and selfish and should be forced to live in the projects for a year. That would certainly change his/her perspective on life and wealth.

Good luck ConnectU!

Baby-faced 18-year-old Brit Carys Copestake has offered her virginity for over $20,000 to help her pay tuition costs for her four-year physics course at Salford University. She used a false name to advertise herself on prostitute Web sites in an effort to keep her parents in the dark about the whole debacle.

The ad on the Web site read as follows: “Virginity For Sale £10,000.” In the description of the ad, Copestake wrote the following:

“Hey, I think the title says it all. I’m an 18-year-old virgin with student funds to pay and I’m looking to sell my first time right here. I’m brunette, 34C, green eyes, all in proportion and good looking.”

In an interview with a reporter, she said that she had been getting curious about the opposite sex and wanted to explore with someone to teach her, and that she found herself in a financial situation and this presented an opportunity to kill two birds with one stone.

After conversations with the reporter who was skeptical as to whether she was truly a virgin or just trying to deceive potential buyers, Copestake announced that she had found a buyer her first customer.

“I’ve been offered the money in cash and I’m going to do it this Thursday. Sorry I’m at work so I can’t speak any more.”

While this story certainly has an amusing factor to it, it’s also very unfortunate at the same time. I crossed out “a buyer” and replaced it with “her first customer” because in effect what she has done is gone and made herself a prostitute. Posting anonymous ads on Web sites with descriptions describing all of your physical attributes in an effort to attract a buyer for sex is clear cut prostitution. But I don’t think we can blame the girl completely, sure she is responsible for her actions, but let’s consider the circumstances of a young girl struggling to pay for university. Has our global society put such an important emphasis on attaining a college degree that now women are willing to become prostitutes just to get one? Unfortunately I think the answer to that question might be yes, although it certainly shouldn’t be, because the stark reality is that a college degree doesn’t do half of what it used to for graduates.

Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad has rejected an offer by American — and Oscar winning — film director Oliver Stone because he is part of the “Great Satan,” according to a semiofficial Iranian news agency.

Mehdi Kalhor, media adviser to the Iranian President, was quoted by the Fars agency on Sunday as saying “I sent a negative answer by Ahmadinejad to Oliver Stone.” He added that it is true Stone is a member of the opposition to the U.S. government, but nonetheless he is still part of the evil American machine.

“It is right that this person is considered part of the opposition in the US, but opposition in the US is a part of the Great Satan.”

The whole “Great Satan” verbiage dates back to the time of the late Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini, who referred to the United States as the Great Satan in the aftermath of the 1979 Islamic Revolution of Iran.

I think this is a stupid move on the part of Iran, especially given Ahmadinejad’s love for manipulating public perception through propaganda. Recall that he has sent letters to not only President Bush but also the American people, trying to achieve a mutual understanding. He has also challenged President Bush to TV debates, which obviously the White House has denied. Making a film with Oliver Stone would give him unprecedented access to the American public, because Big Media wouldn’t be able to censor it.

The only way for peace is diplomacy and negotiations, and with the Neo-Cons banging the Iran war drums this couldn’t be a more timely opportunity for tensions to get diffused.

London businessman Brian Retkin has launched a landmark legal battle against Google that seeks to make the world’s largest search engine liable for publication of inaccurate, malicious or harmful material on the Internet. If successful, the case would make search engines responsible for the content on the Internet and could trigger strong limitations on the free flow of information online.

The 48-year-old man from Wembley began the court proceedings after Google directed users to Web pages that he claims contained “deeply offensive and commercially damaging” material about his various enterprises. For example, one page accuses Retkin of profiting from the September 11th terrorist attacks by providing free registration of domain names that preyed off the stark patriotism at the time. Thus, it is no surprise that such allegations are rumored to have originated here in the U.S.

Retkin, who owns and operates a domain name registrar, claims that for three years he has been trying to persuade Google to remove the defamatory material.

“There comes a point,” said Mr Retkin, “when someone must take responsibility for this material. These allegations were posted anonymously so there is no way of suing the author. Where it has appeared on internet discussion forums we have asked them to remove it but it keeps popping up again at other internet addresses. The only solution is for Google to remove it and give an undertaking they will remove it permanently.”

While US judges have ruled that search engines like Google are immune from defamation lawsuits, the law in Britain takes a different approach, as search engine immunity from defamation is conditional on the search engine not having received formal complaint. So, technically, Retkin actually has a chance of winning.

Realistically, however, let’s be serious. Google is the main source of information throughout the entire globe, and no legal system in its right mind — assuming Britain has its head on straight — would dare to make it censor itself. Retkin needs to show a little backbone. Most everyone on the Internet has been defamed at one time or another. Sure it’s not pleasant and can be very hurtful, but unfortunately it comes with the territory. The Internet is full of trolls and you can’t go around suing search engines because of what they say. Don’t like it, don’t use the Internet. It’s that simple.

According to an AP story via USA Today, Americans gave nearly $300 billion to charity in 2006, setting a record that even topped giving in 2005, which saw a surge in aid to victims of hurricanes Katrina, Rita and Wilma and the Asian tsunami.

Total American donations last year amount to an estimated $295.02 billion, which is a 1% increase over the 2005 amount ($283.05 billion) when adjusted for inflation. Of the 2006 amount, individuals accounted for 75.6%, or $223.03 billion.

Not impressed? Consider it from an alternative perspective, the percentage of GDP given to charity. In this case, the U.S. more than doubles the second place country, Britain. The U.S. ranked first at 1.7%, Britain was second with 0.73%, while France, with a dismal 0.14% rate, trailed countries such as South Africa, Singapore, Turkey and Germany. Who says stereotypes aren’t true?

This is a pleasing article to see, especially given the times we are living. While nearly the entire world hates the U.S. for our current government and its actions, it’s nice to know that we as the general public remain a good, kind-hearted people who maintain an interest in doing the right thing. Now, if only we could do something about that government situation…

In response to Facebook opening up its platform to 3rd party developers, LinkedIn — the social networking site for professionals — has announced that it too will be opening up its platform to 3rd party development to enhance functionality. The announcement came from LinkedIn Chairman Reid Hoffman, who said Friday that over the next 9 months LinkedIn would be delivering APIs to developers to make its platform more like Facebook, and to create a way for users who spent most of their time on Facebook to get LinkedIn notifications.

I think this is a wonderful move on the part of LinkedIn. The site truly is a wonderful tool for professional networking. I’d say roughly half of the professionals I have come across in my career have profiles on the site, and I have received a few job inquiries since signing up less than one year ago. Just as Facebook has seen an explosion in membership since opening up its doors, so too should LinkedIn once it opens up shop.

Ukranian anti-censorship Web site LIEH3OP (censor.net.ua) is reporting that a third U.S. Carrier, the nuclear-powered USS Enterprise Strike Group, is currently en route to the Persian Gulf where it will join the USS Nimitz and USS Stennis already stationed there. The USS Enterprise CVN 65-Big E Strike Group is the largest aircraft carrier in the U.S. Navy, and its addition to the Persian Gulf will mark the largest buildup of U.S. forces against Iran ever — including more aircraft carriers than during the 2003 invasion of Iraq.

In addition, LIEH3OP adds that during his Middle Eastern tour in May, U.S. Vice President Dick Cheney made assurances to Gulf and other Middle Eastern nations that the U.S. would eventually have four carriers in the region to protect serve its interests:

Washington is considering deploying the fourth US carrier for the region in the Red Sea opposite Saudi Arabian western coast to secure the three US carriers in the Gulf from the rear as well as the Gulf of Aqaba and Suez Canal.

My question for all of this is, where on Earth is the Western media? When the U.S. sent in the second carrier a little while back it was all over the news for debate and discussion. Now they’re sending a THIRD carrier and it is floating along under the radar. This is just absurd to me. The censorship and secrecy with which this government operates is appalling to the point where it makes me ashamed to be an American. The Bush administration is ruining our country and everyone is just sitting around letting it happen. Why deploy one of the largest — if not THE largest — naval forces to the Persian Gulf if you’re not making preparations for a war. Actually, in my mind there is no doubt that Bush and Cheney will start a war with Iran. All that remains is for some Iranian “smoking-gun” to be created by the U.S. government and then the bombs will start falling around Tehran. My only prayer is that the madmen in Washington don’t drop anything nuclear, because the backlash against the U.S. will be harsh, violent, long lasting, and worldwide in scope.

War is not the answer to the world’s problems. Human beings have been fighting each other for thousands of years, and what has come of it as a result? More wars. Perhaps it’s time to give peace a whirl; I’m down for that. Anybody else?

This is a horrible story that will make you think twice about going to your favorite amusement park. Kentucky Police have confirmed that a girl’s feet were cut off by a malfunctioning ride at the Six Flags Kentucky Kingdom amusement park.

Law enforcement officials say that they received a call around 5 PM today stating that both of a young girl’s feet had been detached at the ankle.

Although there’s no information about the girl, meaning she was probably a minor, we do know that the malfunctioning ride was Superman Tower of Power, which stands 177 feet high and accelerates riders to 54 mph. Police dispatchers said the girl was taken to a local hospital.

This is a very tragic story that illustrates how one can never be too careful when it comes to operating big machinery. Clearly these amusement parks take all the necessary precautions when constructing and testing these rides, as to not do so would amount to closures from all of the legal issues that would arise, nevertheless it’s apparent that these rides need to be tested even further.

My thoughts and prayers go out to this girl and her family.

Yahoo’s Hong Kong division declared yesterday that the Chinese government is likely blocking the country’s 140 million Web users from Flickr.com, the Yahoo-owned popular photo-sharing site. Flickr has not shown photos to users in mainland China since last week, amid speculation that Beijing censored the site after images of the 1989 Tiananmen massacre were posted. The communist government of China has banned all references to the June 4, 1989 Tiananmen Square massacre in state media, the Internet and books.

Officials from China’s Ministry of Information Industry were unable for comment yesterday. In China it is very much taboo to discuss the massacre that killed thousands when the government called in the army to cut the head off the democracy movement.

So here we have yet another bout in the fight against online censorship. Back in March I wrote about a Chinese university dean who was fired over a blog entry. And it seems the Chinese government has not come very far since then. What’s even worse with this scenario though is that this is offline as well. Given that the Chinese government has forbid all discussion of the massacre on any medium, one can assume a fair amount of the public — over a billion in China — doesn’t even know about it. And worse than not being able to talk about it is not even knowing about it at all. I await the day that the Chinese population gets sick of communism and attains a free, democratic society through revolution. It’s bound to happen one day…