I had a thought today: what if I was using an international online dating service and really liked a girl from, let’s say, Japan? I imagined that I would write to her “hi” and “how are you” and maybe “how’s your day going”, and then my imagination arrived at an impasse. Do I know anything about Japan or Japanese culture, literature or food (besides sushi, of course!) that can help keep a conversation going? Probably not! Being a native Russian, I assume all the time that people should just know some random facts about Russia; in the same vein, people from Japan are likely to be of the same opinion. However, if there’s a guy somewhere in Australia who has hardly ever traveled and who really likes a girl from Moscow, he might be somewhat anxious about how start a conversation or what she would love to talk about that wouldn’t be boring! Well, in this article I will give you some hints about how not only start a conversation with Russian women, but also make them think that you are a very intelligent person, who knows a lot about different countries – trust me, that’s always an attention-getter.

# 1. Politics.

If you want to make a good impression on Russian ladies for marriage, then you have to be an intelligent person (which you are) who is interested in what’s going on in the world. So at the very least you should ask for her opinion about the last Russian election. If you were interested in politics, you would have seen on the news that this year’s elections were accompanied by numerous protests. If a woman you like is from a big city in Russia, ask her: did she go to one of these meetings? Was it fun? Stressful? Scary?

# 2. Traveling.

Russian ladies love to travel! I honestly have never seen a single one who doesn’t. They also love to hear stories about the places you’ve been to – especially if it’s somewhere exotic. However, if you’ve been to Turkey or Egypt, which are very popular travel destinations for Russian people and are not considered exotic or cool anymore, you can still talk a lot about what you liked and what you didn’t, like hospitality, food, weather etc. Saying that your dream is to get married on an island somewhere would totally sweep Russian women for marriage off their feet. Also, don’t forget to say that you are planning to travel a lot more in your life, and someday you will definitely visit Russia, because it is of particular interest to you. It is understandable if you’ve never wanted to do that, but if your future bride is there (which may just be the girl you are chatting with right now), then you didn’t lie at all – you do have an interest in visiting that country!

# 3. Food.

Practice shows that many American/Australian/Western people do not tend to like Russian food – and it is not because it is not tasty, just because they are not used to it. I had a friend from Wisconsin, USA, who never even wanted to try our national food, convincing me to go get pizza over and over again. My advice for you is to try being more open-minded. Go to the nearest restaurant that serves Russian food and try some of the most popular entrees. I would hope that you would like at least some of them. If you are looking for women for marriage, then you should not forget that a big part of a real marriage situation is having home-cooked meals. What if your fair lady is from Russia? Then you’d better get used to the taste of borsht, pelmeni and Russian salad. Yum!

That is all the advice for today about what Russian ladies love to hear during their first conversation with a foreigner.

George Tenet, the man who served as director of the Central Intelligence Agency on the day of the 9/11 terrorist attack — indeed, a man who served in that stressful job for almost eight years under two presidents — tells the riveting story in his memoirs of how Saudi intelligence captured a handful of senior Al Qaeda operatives in 2003, a group that included the notorious Shaykh Nasir bin Hamin al-Fahd. It was a real coup.

What made Al-Fahd fall onto the radar of every intelligence service in Europe and America was a document he authored with the terrifying title “A Treatise on the Legal Status of Using Weapons of Mass Destruction Against Infidels.” The weapons he’s referring to are atomic bombs. Where on earth would Al Qaeda terrorists get atomic bombs?

Al-Fahd had clearly made a credible exhortation, from the top level of Al Qaeda senior management, to use nuclear weapons against Western targets. And now he was in a Saudi dungeon.

Under merciless interrogation by the Saudi Mukhabarat (the secret police), using methods that would have been frowned upon even at Guantanamo, Al-Fahd confessed that Al Qaeda had been bargaining with black market arms merchants in Moscow for “portable” nuclear weapons. Though under extreme duress, Al-Fahd would not (more likely, could not) reveal useful details.

We tend to think of nuclear weapons as very big objects, devices like “Fat Boy,” the bomb that partially Nagasaki — big, heavy objects that need submarines or missiles or Air Force flying fortresses to move around. But there has long been a sub-category of much smaller nuclear weapons, including several designs made by the United States. These are often referred to by media as “suitcase nukes” or “vest-pocket nukes.”

The two most famous of these produced by USA were the “Davy Crockett” a rifle-launched nuclear device that was fired much like a mortar at an enemy a few miles away, and the Mk-54 SADM (Special Atomic Demolition Munition) a 60-pound bomb that was small enough to fit in a large trunk or footlocker.

Though these weapons were pipsqueaks compared to the nation-destroying multi-megaton hydrogen bombs developed in the 1950s and 1960s, any atomic bomb, even the smallest, is capable of killing millions of human beings in urban environments.

The least complex device, in theory, would simply be a mass of purified plutonium that was approaching criticality under normal conditions at room temperature. If you accumulate between 20 and 22 pounds of elemental plutonium in a sphere, the internal level of radiation soon reaches sufficient intensity to cause spontaneous fission of the entire mass — in a matter of nano-seconds, the reaction gets out of control and you have a nuclear explosion. Such a bomb would require no detonator, just the accumulation of the plutonium in one place. It would surely also incinerate whoever was unwise enough to put that much plutonium together in one place.

Even a piece of plutonium the size of a half-dollar is warm to the touch, so much internal fission is taking place, releasing energy all the time.

The actual “suitcase” weapons built by the United States could deliver something in the neighborhood of five kilotons of explosive force (compared to 16 kilotons for the bomb that destroyed Hiroshima and 21 kilotons for the bomb dropped on Nagasaki).

A fifteen kiloton device detonated in central Manhattan would vaporize everything within a radius of just over a mile. Anyone within five to 10 miles would likely fall prey to radiation poisoning, burns, or injury from flying debris. Multiple millions would die in such a scenario. Compare that to the 3,000 who died in 9/11.

These small weapons are called “tactical” in the sense that they would be used on the battlefield to change the course of a skirmish rather than define the outcome of a war. Their value was their portability and size. But that was also their main liability. They were likely to explode so close to the people who deployed them that nuclear blowback and fallout could affect the wrong troops.

A 1994 U.S. law (since repealed in the aftermath of 9/11) forbade nuclear weapons with a yield of five kilotons or less, but by 1994 the Pentagon had long ago mothballed such weapons as unpractical and almost useless.

America’s “suitcase” weapons can all be accounted for. But what happened to those made in the former USSR? A number of Soviet-era defectors, including Stanislav Lunev, have described the Russian devices in great specificity. Lunev assured American spy agencies that many of them were lost in the period of perestroika, when Gorbachev and the first President Bush agreed on wide-reaching nuclear arms reductions. In that period, some 30,000 nuclear weapons were supposedly recalled to Moscow.

If only one per cent of them slipped through the net, then 300 such weapons could be floating around on the black market for purchase by terrorists. Not even the most optimistic scenarios suggest that 99 per cent of the weapons were safeguarded, so the true number is certainly much larger than 300 weapons.

Though critics today regularly dismiss talk of “suitcase nukes” as fodder for thriller writers, George Tenet reports in his autobiography that the CIA was unable to get any good leads on the hundreds of missing Soviet-era nuclear bombs that certainly never made it back to Moscow for disassembly.

“Of all al-Qaeda’s efforts to obtain other forms of WMD, the main threat is the nuclear one. I am convinced that this is where Osama bin Laden and his operatives desperately wanted to go. They understand that bombings by cars, trucks, trains and planes will get them some headlines, to be sure. But if they manage to set off a mushroom cloud, they will make history — such an event would place Al Qaeda on par with the superpowers and make good Bin Laden’s threat to destroy our economy and bring death into every American household.”

Tenet went on to say that it was not “beyond the realm of possibility” for any terrorist group, not just Al Qaeda, to obtain a nuclear weapon.

“One mushroom cloud would change history,” he wrote.

Another analyst, Paul Williams, has asserted in “Osama’s Revenge: The Next 9/11” that Al Qaeda has been planning a spectacular nuclear fire show using a half-dozen portable nuclear weapons that would be detonated simultaneously in major American urban centers.

So where are the missing Russian bombs? Retired Russian generals and colonels who were in positions of authority when Gorbachev ordered the recall of nuclear technology have claimed that at least fifty ADMs (atomic demolition devices, the smallest size nuclear bomb) could definitively not be accounted for and had to be presumed to be in the hands of bad actors, probably for sale to the highest bidder. Such allegations are hard to prove, but they are equally hard to disprove.

And what would it take to keep a “suitcase nuke” in operable condition, even thirty or forty years after its manufacture?

The main requirement would be a permanent source of electricity to keep the internal electrical mechanics functioning and the batteries charged. A simple wall outlet in any home or office would do very nicely.

Did you know…

Romanian national women’s volleyball team qualified for the 1980 Olympic Games.

Nadia Elena Comaneci is one of the symbols of the 1970s. Romania’s Nadia was the best athlete at the 1976 Montreal Summer Olympic Games. Nadia was 14 years old when she won three Olympic gold medals in Montreal’76. Nadia had also made history when she became the first Olympic gymnast to score a perfect ten points (unven bars). Her distinction was the most important moment in the Games. Anita Verschoth, who is a sportswriter, wrote: “She stunned the judges as well as the crowd not only with double somersaults and twists but also with an uncommon consistency and stability even in her most difficult moves. She displayed an unflappable confidence and more stamina and strength than seemed possible for a body as apparently frail as hers. When the competition was over, everybody was talking about Comaneci. She had put an emphatie end to the classical style, with its emphasis on maturity and ladylike grace”. Four years later, she won 2 gold medals at the 1980 Olympic Games in Moscow (Soviet Union). The following year Nadia won several medals at the1981Summer World University Games in Bucharest. Nadia was born on November 12, 1961 in Onesti, Romania.

This European country won two gold medals at the 1999 IAAF World Track and Field Championships in Seville (Spain ).

The most popular sports in Romania are soccer, handball, gymnastics, aquatics, tennis, volleyball, basketball, water polo, shooting, boxing and athletics.

Dinamo Bucharest was one of the most famous handball clubs in the world. This club won many international tournaments in Europe. Other popular clubs were Stiinta Bucharest (European champion), Uni Timisora, Rapid Bucharest (Continental champio ), Steaua Bucharest (European champion)…

Romania sent 63 athletes to the 1988 Summer Olympics in Seoul, South Korea.

Bucharest hosted the 1981 World University Games. More than 2,900 athletes from 86 countries competed in 10 sports. Romania had many winners: Emilian Nicula, Kurt Szilier, Dan Odorhean, Nadia Comaneci, Emilia Eberle , Doina Melinte, Florenta Craciunescu-Tacu and Carmen Bonaciu.

This European country participated in the Francophonie Games in 2001.

Romania won the gold medal in water polo in the World University Games in 1977.

The best Olympic athletes are: Nadia Comaneci (gymnastics), Viorica Viscopoleanu (long jump/ track & field/ Olympic champion, 1968), Lia Manoliu (discus throw /athletics/ gold medalist, 1968), Iolanda Balas (high jump /athletics/ gold medalist, 1960 & 1964), Mihaela Penes (javelin throw/ world champion/ Tokyo 1964), Ivan Patzaichin (kayak / world champion/ Mexico City 1968), Ion Drimba (fencing/ Olympic champion/ Mexico City 1968), Nicolae Martinescu (wrestling/ world champion/ Munich 1972), Corneliu Ion (rapid-fire pisto/ shooting/ Moscow 1980), Sanda Toma (single sculls/ rowing/ Moscow 1980), Doina Melinte (800m/ track & field/ Los Angeles 1984), Maricica Puica (3,000m/ athletics/ Los Angeles 1984), Ekaterina Szabo (floor exercises/ gymnastics/ Los Angeles 1984), Simona Pauca (balance beam/ gymnastics/ Los Angeles 1984), Paula Ivan (1, 500m/ track & field/ Seoul 1988), Daniela Silivas (asymmetrical bars/ gymnastics/ Seoul 1988), Sorin Babii (free pistol/ shooting/ Seoul 1988), Lavinia Milosovici (floor exercises/ gymnastics/ Barcelona 1992), Elisabeta Lipa (single sculls/ rowing/ Barcelona 1992), Laura Badea (foil individual/ fencing/ Atlanta 1996), Simona Amanar (side horse vault/ gymnastics/ Atlanta 1996), Gabriela Szabo (5,00m/ athletics/ Sydney 2000), Mihai Claudiu Covaliu (sabre individual/ fencing/ Sydney 2000), Dina Monacu (100m & 200m backstroke/ swimming/ Sydney 2000), Marius Urzica (pommeled horse/ gymnastics/ Sydney 2000), Camelia Potec (200m freestyle/ aquatics/ Athens 2004), Catalina Ponor (floor exercise/ gymnastics/ Athens 2004)…

This European country won the gold medal at the 1970 World Women’s Handball Championships in Amsterdam (Holland).

Elisabeta Lipa was the flag bearer of the Romanian Olympic team at the 2004 Summer Olympic Games in Greece.

Bucharest hosted the World Women’s Handball Championships in 1962. Final standings:

1.Romania

2.Denmark

3.Czechoslovakia

From 1924 to 2004, Romania -former socialist republic- has won 283 Olympic medals (82 golds, 88 silvers, 113 bronzes). Unlike Bulgaria, Cuba, North Korea, Poland, Vietnam, Hungary and Ethiopia, Romania did not boycott the Olympic Games in 1984. This European country sent 127 athletes to the Olympic Games in the United States.

Hosts………………..Gold……Silver… Bronze…Total….Ranking

Paris-1924……………0………..0…………1…………1……….23

Berlin-1936…………..0………..1…………0…………1………25

Helsinki-1952……….1……….1…………2…………4………23

Melbourne-1956……5……….3…………5………..13………9

Rome-1960…………..3……….1…………6………..10……..11

Tokyo-1964……………2………4…………6…………12…….14

Mexico-1968………….4………6…………5…………15…….12

Munich-1972…………3………6…………7…………16…….13

Montreal-1976………4………9……….14…………27………9

Moscow-1980………6……….6………13…………25………7

Los Angeles-84…..20…….16……..17…………53………2

Seoul-1988…………..7……..11……….6…………24………8

Barcelona-92……….4………..6……….8…………18…….14

Atlanta-1996…………4……….7……….9…………20……..14

Sydney-2000………11……….6……….9…………26……..11

Athens-2004………..8……….5………..6…………19……..14

One man’s single-minded determination built this city on a swamp, on territory claimed by the enemy. Years later, Hitler decreed it should be wiped off the face of the earth. The name of the city? St. Petersburg, Russia’s Window on Europe, Venice of the North, City of Light, is quite simply the most beautiful city I’ve ever seen. It overwhelms the eye, and the soul.

It was conceived in the mind of Peter the Great, aptly named, as he stood 7’2″ tall and cast an even longer shadow, and born by his will, built, as they say, with the bones of thousands of serfs, and built where no city could or should be built.

“The history of the city,” writes the BBC, “is a story of the triumph of human will over the elements.” It was the Russian winter, after all, that finally defeated Napoleon, and St. Petersburg is nearly parallel to Helsinki.

It is said that one day the tsar of Russia, who, determined to make Russia a country in its own right, not the colony of one of the super powers busy at the time dividing the world amongst them, single-handedly dragged his country into the appropriate century, galloped across the swamp to where the Neva River meets the Gulf of Finland, dismounted, plunged his saber into the mire, and declared, “Here shall be a city.”

Not only was it built on a swamp, it was built on a swamp that Russia didn’t own. Perennially at war with Sweden, the land was at the time claimed by the Swedes. Early settlers immediately experienced floods, and it was considered inhabitable … none of which mattered to Peter.

Or perhaps it did. The man had a vision and a statement to make, and it was a politically strategic location.

Peter’s mission was to drag the Russian people, kicking and screaming, into the modern world. For what’s a city with no people in it? Peter commanded the boyars to move from Moscow to St. Petersburg, to dress and behave like Westerners, and to shave their beards. In the Russian Orthodox religion, the longer one’s beard, the greater the likelihood he would enter heaven. Peter the Great didn’t care.

St. Petersburg was a political statement, and so was its reconstruction for its 300th anniversary two years ago. With roads and houses in disrepair, the people watched as hundreds of millions of dollars were poured into reconstruction of the presidential palace and other cultural treasures. The total for renovation was said to be $2 billion.

Of the restoration, Bob Parsos, BBC, wrote: “The people of this, the most European of Russian cities, are proud of the city’s cultural heritage…But the hundreds of pensioners whose country cottages and gardens were razed to the ground to make way for the restoration of the Konstantinovsky Palace are seething with rage.” It was done without their input or consent, so as not to be an embarrassment when dignitaries visited for the celebration.

Like most of us, about many things, they were “grudgingly happy” with the outcome. Shall we say ambivalent?

Does the city, does the world, need The State Hermitage, one of the world’s great museum, which is comprised of six buildings and sprawls along the Neva in the heart of the city?

The city has its history. Stalin’s purges in the 1920s included as many as a quarter of the city’s inhabitants, and more than a million died while the Germans held siege to the city for 900 days during World War II. That’s three years.

Standing inside the Hermitage, we saw pictures of the devastation. On the Hermitage website, you can read an excerpt from the instructions of Hitler’s high command on the destruction of Leningrad, dated September 29, 1941:

“…2. The Fuehrer has decided to wipe the city of St Petersburg from the face of the earth. We have no interest in the preservation of even a part of the population of that city.

4. It is proposed to tightly encircle the city and by shelling from artillery of all calibres and constant aerial bombing to raze it to the ground…”

Nearly two million civilians, including about 400,000 children, plus troops were trapped inside the city. According to ‘The History of St. Petersburg.’:

“Food and fuel supplies were very limited (enough for 1 or 2 months only). All public transportation has stopped. By the winter of 1941-42 there was no heating, no water supply, almost no electricity and very little food. In January 1942, in the middle of an unusually cold winter, the lowest food rations in the city were only 125 grams (about 1/4 of a pound)…”

Just down from the Heritage is the Peter and Paul Fortress, the first stones Peter the Great, Tsar of Russia, laid. We toured this as well. Over the years it housed Russia’s most famous political prisoners.

We human beings are not reasonable creatures. If we were, half the wonderful things in the world would not exist. But we are capable of being reasonable. If we were not, the tilting at windmills would have broken us eons ago.

It requires the wisdom of Solomon to know and be both, and to choose when and in what proportion.

“The reasonable man adapts himself to the conditions that surround him, “wrote George Bernard Shaw. “The unreasonable man adapts surroundings to himself. All progress depends on the unreasonable man.”

APRIL 19, 1975 was a red letter day in the history of India’s space program. It was on this day that the Indian Satellite Aryabhatta was successfully launched into the space. This diamond shaped, 26 faced, blue and violet space craft weighing 360kg, was shot into a near circular orbit at an inclination of 510 to the equator, from a Soviet cosmodrome near Moscow. Designed and developed by Indian Scientists and Engineers at its Space Research Centre, Bangalore, with 90% Indian made components this first satellite is named after the fifth century Indian mathematician and astronomer Aryabhatta. Its aim is to explore the atmosphere of the outer space. Monitored by the SHAR centre, Sriharikota, it transmits important information which is received by three tracking stations – located in Russia, France and India. (Shriharikotta)

Then came Bhaskara, the second Indian satellite. It was launched on June 7, 1979, also from Russia. This 44-kg experimental satellite, named Bhaskara – I after another ancient Indian mathematician, is meant for earth observations. Carrying radiometers, infra red TV cameras, it transmit data about hydrology, forestry, oceanography and meteorology. Again on November 20, 1981 bhaskara – II an improved version of Bhaskara – I was launched. With two TV cameras and 3 frequency microwave radiometer system, it has a wider scanning range.

But it is the Rohini Satellite (RSI) that was first launched from India. It was put into orbit by the indigenously made Satellite Launch Vehicle SLV-3 on July 18, 1980. this 4 – stage solid propellant rocket was designed and developed by the Indian scientists and engineers of Vikram Sarabhai Space Centre, Thiruvananthapuram. It also placed another satellite of 38 kg – Rohini (RSDI) into orbit, with the fundamental objective of evaluating the vertical performance for future programs. The launching was successful, but the satellite’s orbital life ended abruptly in 9 days instead of 90days as planned. Again another 41.5kg. Rohini – 2 (RSD 2) was put into Low – Earth – Orbit on April 17, 1983, with the help of 23 meter SLV – 3 weighing 17 tons, also built by Vikram Sarabhai Space Centre. The successful launching of RSD 2 completed the planned development of its SLV – 3 series and set the stage for Augmented Satellite Launch Vehicles (ASLV’S), capable of hurling into space, satellites weighing 150kg and PSLV’S capable of placing satellites in geo-synchronous orbit.

The Indian Space Application Centre (ISAC) Ahmedabad, developed a 657.5kg 3 axis, stabilized geo-station-ary satellite called APPLE. This was launched on June 19, 1981, from Kourou’s in French Guyana, by the European Space Agency’s Arian rocket, thus demonstrating again that India can accomplish great technological feats and scientific marvels. APPLE was India’s first 3-axis stabilized geo-stationary communication satellite and India is the fifth nation to obtain the distinction of developing such a satellite. USA, USSR, France and Canada alone had this distinction earlier. Though the tracking stations at Sriharikota, Ahmedabad, Fuji and Kourou, started receiving information about the altitude, temperature, etc., it is on 27th June, 8 days after its take off that the Indian scientists could successfully complete all the maneuvers to put the APPLE on its planned course. Tense moments ended and India won the applause.

But APPLE is only a take off point of a series for INSAT satellite to be launched for the purpose of telecommunication, TV and meteorological net work.

The program received a set back when its first multipurpose satellite INSAT – IA failed, 5 months after its launch on April 10, 1982. Built for the Indian Space Research Organization (ISRO) by the Ford Aerospace of USA and launched by NASA it was, to be the first step towards the implementation of ‘Operation Space System’ for identifying social economic objectives and national requirements, combining the services of telecommunication, meteorology, TV relay and Radio broadcasting. The satellite which journeyed through 37,000km in space passing over Indonesia upset the telecommunication, TV and Radio net work programs.

Under STEP ( Satellite Telecommunication Experiment Project ), ISRO has conducted experiments in remote area communications, using transportable terminals, radio net working integration of satellite circuits, in territorial net work and multiple audio – video, transmission.

The indigenous IRS-IA, which was launched by Vostok vehicle on March 17, 1988 form USSR has a variety of uses to assess the amount of mulberry growth, or the growth of cotton, rice, groundnut and wheat. It would be possible to estimate the output well in advance, before the harvest is made.

And now, the INSAT – D series of satellites are to be launched with its own technology. With this India has joined the select band of countries that have lanunched satellites. On April 3,1989, the Soviet Rocket Souyuz zoomed into the space. It was significant to India because, on its crew was an Indian – Squadron Leader Rakhesh Sharma. And now we can proudly say, we too have a Neil Armstrong amongst us.

Thus the primary aim of Indian space program is the application of space science and technology to develop mass communication and education programs and conduct survey of natural resources through the launching of satellites, with maximum self reliance.

The Indian Space Research Organization (ISRO) is responsible for planning, execution and management of Space Research. The major establishments it has are: The Vikram Sarabhai Space Centre (VSSC) at Thiruvanathapuram; the ISRO satellite centre at Bangalore; the SHAR launching centre at Sriharikota and the Space Application Centre (SAC) at Ahmedabad. While VSSC is the main research and development centre, SHAR is its Launching Station.

Most slow cooker recipes require 8 hours or more to cook. But if you don’t have the luxury of time but still want to use your crock pot to prepare a delicious dish, don’t worry – there are plenty of fast slow cooker recipes to choose from! They require less hours of cooking but still give the same delicious result – perfect for when you have unexpected guests coming over for dinner!

Try these amazingly good fast slow cooker recipes:

Amazing Crock Pot Turkey Chili

What you need:

• 1/2 kilogram ground turkey
• 1/2 medium onion, chopped
• 2 cans low sodium tomato soup
• 2 cans kidney beans, drained
• 1 can black beans, drained
• 2 tablespoons chili powder
• 1 tablespoon vegetable oil
• 1/2 tablespoon ground cumin
• 1/2 tablespoon garlic powder
• 1 teaspoon red pepper flakes
• 1 pinch ground allspice
• 1 pinch ground black pepper
• Salt to taste

Heat vegetable oil in a pan over medium heat and cook ground turkey until browned. Drain and transfer to a slow cooker. Add onion, tomato soup, kidney beans and black beans to the pot and season with chili powder, cumin, garlic powder, red pepper flakes, allspice, pepper and salt. Stir to combine ingredients well. Cover and cook for 4 hours on high.

Delicious Butter and Cheese Slow Cooked Squash

What you need:

• 1 3/4 kilograms yellow summer squash, sliced
• 1 small onion, chopped
• 1/2 cup processed cheese food, cubed
• 1/4 cup butter, cubed

Combine squash and onion in a large pot and pour just enough water to cover. Bring to a boil, reduce heat and simmer for 10 minutes or until vegetables are tender. Drain. Layer squash, onion, butter and cheese in a crockpot. Cover and cook for 1 hour on low or until squash is very tender.

Crock Pot Moscow Style Chicken

What you need:

• 6 chicken thighs, cooked
• 6 slices bacon
• 2 onions, chopped
• 2 cloves garlic, roughly chopped
• 1 1/4 cups Russian-style salad dressing
• 1/2 teaspoon grated ginger root
• Salt and pepper to taste

Wrap each cooked chicken thigh with bacon and arrange at the bottom of a slow cooker. Add onion, garlic and ginger to the pot then top with Russian-style salad dressing. Cover and cook for 5 hours on low. Season with salt and pepper before serving.

If you’re pressed for time, these hearty fast slow cooker recipes will be your life savers!

Pugilist John Munduga, a Lugbara of northwestern Uganda ancestry was one of the nation’s top boxers during his amateur career of the late 1970’s and early 1980’s. He was conspicuous for his lean build and tallness. Though he was in the lower weight classes, he was slightly over 6 feet tall. He has been regarded as one of the most skillful of Ugandan boxers. He would dabble as captain of the Uganda boxing team as he represented Uganda in several regional tournaments. Munduga competed at the summer Olympics that were held in Moscow in 1980, and he was there the national captain. As a professional, he fought in Europe and the United States where he brawled with several famous and top boxers. Munduga had a very high knockout ratio, and he remained undefeated for a relatively long time. He now resides in his native Uganda (in Naguru where he was born) where he is a high school coach and trainer–notably at Kololo High School near Kampala. During 2000, he was the national coach of the Rwanda boxing team.

Munduga was born on January 15th 1961 in Naguru near Kampala in Uganda where he studied at St. Jude Primary School where he played soccer. But he, early in life, became interested in boxing when he hang out at the Naguru Community Center near Kampala. He became a school boxing champion for several years, and then a national junior champion at age 11.

In 1977, Munduga represented Uganda at the annual Kenya vs. Uganda Urafiki Tournament. He won in the fight. He was summoned by national coach Grace Sseruwagi to get into residential training with the novices. Munduga excelled by beating his opponents then he was selected as the youngest on the team of Ugandan boxers to Thailand to fight in the international King’s Cup. Munduga impressively won a bronze medal.

In January 1978, at a Uganda vs. Poland match in Kampala, Munduga defeated Roman Gotfryd after the bout was stopped.

At the All-Africa Games of 1978, held in Algiers, Munduga lost in the second round to Kenyan Steve Muchoki who is renowned to have in the past beaten James Odwori, and having become am amateur world Champion. He tehrefore failed to move into the medal bracket.

Munduga represented Uganda at the Feliks Stamm Memorial Invitational that was held in Warsaw from November 9-11 in 1978. In the quarter-finals, the Ugandan defeated Jose Luis Rios of Cuba by 4:1. In the semi-finals Munduga beat Yuriy Prokhorov of the Soviet Union by 3:2. In the finals Munduga triumphed by beating Leszek Kosedowski (Poland) by 4:1. Here again, he won the gold. Out of the five Ugandan boxers at this venue, only Munduga was victorious.

At the Poland vs. Uganda Dual of February 1979, held in Warsaw, Munduga triumphed over the Pole Kazimierz Adach. Here boxers like Mugabi, Odwori, Butambeki, and Siryakibe were defeated.

Still in February 1979, Munduga was triumphant in the town Schwerin in German Democratic Republic where a dual match was held against Uganda. Munduga here defeated Lutz Kaesebier. Of the other Ugandan boxers, only Adroni Butambeki was triumphant.

Munduga was a 19 year-old when at the 1980 Olympics held in Moscow he was pitted against 25 year-old Nelson Jose Rodriguez of Venezuela in the first preliminary round of the light-welterweight contest. At just 5’5″, Rodriguez was about half a foot shorter than Munduga. The Ugandan triumphed on this July 21st 1980 by winning on points.

Munduga’s next Olympic battle would happen on July 26th, and here in the second preliminary he would box against Farouk Chanchoun Jawad of Iraq. Though much shorter, 25 year-old Chanchoun who was more experienced, would knock out Munduga in the second minute of the first round. The Ugandan claims that he started well, but then was unfairly punched in the neck and fell unconscious. Chanchoun is famously known to have been the Asia champion thrice. Munduga would take the position of 9th overall in the light-welterweight division.

But though Mugabi would win Uganda’s sole medal at the Olympics in Moscow, Munduga clearly stands out as the Uganda amateur pugilist that triumphed most for Uganda during the late 1970’s. He comes to mind as a very hardworking, skillful, dedicated and disciplined during a time when Uganda’s significance in boxing was quickly slipping down.

The World Boxing Council (WBC) rankings of July 24th 1987 ranked two Ugandan “Johns,” who had also represented Uganda at the Olympics, as among the top ten contenders for the world Super welterweight crown. Lupe Aquino of Mexico was the champion, John “the Beast” Mugabi was the top contender, while John Munduga was ranked as the sixth top contender. Apart from theoretically being rivals for the crown, the two were probably sparring partners given that they were both managed by Mickey Duff in Tampa in Florida. Mugabi, as a welterweight had won Uganda’s only medal haul at the Moscow Olympics–a silver in the welterweight division. On the world professional scene, Munduga would get to be nicknamed, “the Matador.” Munduga would talk of his boyhood friend Mugabi as one who “had a big punch early… at 9, 10 years, he used to knock boys out… was the only one that age who could” (Berger 1986).

Munduga started boxing as a professional in Germany, in November 1981, where he fought the first fourteen of his professional fights. Here he fought a cross-section of boxers from near and far, and he established an 85% record in these fights from 1981 to early 1984.

Thereafter he started competing in the United States whereby his first battle here was with Tommy Rogers in Tampa. He knocked out Rogers, then continued with his typical trend of knocking out most of his opponents up to when he battled Leland Hart whom he beat by points in Atlantic City in May 1986. At this stage, Munduga had a clean and imposing record of 24 wins, 0 losses, with 18 knockouts.

The next fight would be a scheduled 10-rounder with renowned American Mark Breland, a very 6’2.5″ welterweight who had won Olympic gold at the Olympics held in Los Angeles in 1984. He was two inches taller than Munduga. A very popular figure, 23 year-old Breland dabbled as an actor, and he had a very impressive streak as USA amateur champion. On June 21st 1986, Breland was pitted against the Ugandan. This happened at the Sands Casino Hotel in Atlantic City in New Jersey. Munduga was then ranked as ninth on the list of contenders for the welterweight crown, by the World Boxing Association (WBA), and sixth on the list of junior middle-weight contenders, by the WBC.

Munduga believed that it would be advantageous for him to land punches on Breland because the two were about equal in height. Munduga added that Breland had never fought an opponent as skillful as himself and he added that this was a big fight for which he had trained hard for. Breland, stating that he had fought many tall fighters during his amateur days, most of whom he had stopped, opined that it was tougher to fight short boxers. He had to bend lower to fight them, and bend even lower when they duck. Breland also regarded Munduga as the typical European fighter who would not be much of a problem, one who stands erect and comes right at you. According to Breland, Munduga had a good jab and looping right, but he was not much of a good puncher. Breland fought his first professional fight, only two months after he had won the gold medal at the Olympics in Los Angeles. He was touted to be “the next Sugar Ray Leonard,” an image that he would eventually not measure up to.

The first round revealed that both were right-handed, conventional style boxers. The taller and longer-armed Breland used these too his advantage of keeping Munduga at bay with these advantages though Munduga keeps attacking. In the first round the two were mainly feeling each other out for the pattern, the round was roughly even, but Breland uses the arm advantage to win.

In the second round, Munduga is rocked with a hard punch in the first few seconds, and he stumbles. Breland is very aware of it and he gradually moves in to attempt a knockout punch. Munduga has slowed down and he is indeed slightly hurt. But Munduga keeps attacking while the opponent’s typical reach keeps him away from scoring much. Breland’s height, slenderness, stance, and rocking blows remind one of a younger Thomas “Hitman” Hearns.

In round three, Bill Cosby, Muhammad Ali, Don King, and Jesse Jackson are seen in the high capacity 15000-audience that has come to see an Olympic celebrity box. At this time Breland was undefeated in 12 fights, but his knockout ratio was far less spectacular than that of Munduga. In this third round, Munduga is perplexed as to what tactics to use, but he courageously keeps going after Breland though he keeps running into the long-range punches of Breland.

In the fourth round Munduga becomes much more aggressive, but he is getting tired. However, Breland is apparently more fresh and gradual, like he is waiting for the chance to deliver the onslaught. Still, in this fourth round, Munduga delivers his best punches of the round, and they seem to slightly rock Breland off balance.

In the fifth round, Munduga displays more courage and confidence. He even rocks Breland when he is against the ropes, and he goes on to speed up on the attacking.

In the sixth round, the slugger Munduga is again the aggressive one and he keeps attacking Breland as he hopes to get through the opponent’s longer arms. Breland displays patience but awareness of his opponents rising confidence. He seems to wait for Munduga to become reckless and careless and leave his head open to blows. Indeed the moment comes in the sixth round. As Munduga further delivers powerful blows, Breland takes the upper hand and delivers solid killer uppercut and right-left-right bows to Munduga’s head that knock him down senseless on his back. The medical team quickly moves into the ring to attend to Munduga whose left eye is quickly closing up. The fight is decisively over; the referee Paul Venti did not bother to count him out. Munduga was hereby defeated for the first time in his boxing career. The boxing world mostly remembers Munduga because of this fight in which he displayed courage and skill against a famed and seasoned boxer.

Confident and victorious Breland remarked after the fight (AP 1986: 32).

“His plan was to come forward, hit and get hit. I knew he was a good puncher, but I punch pretty good too. His game plan was taken away and you can’t adjust in the ring unless you are real smart.”

Five weeks before the fight with Munduga, just after he had knocked out Ricky Avendano in the first minute of the first round, Breland was asked about how he rated himself, and he replied (AP 1986: 19).

“I really don’t know. What I do know is that I don’t want to be rushed into a title fight. Maybe a year or a year and a half from now. I want everything to be perfect.”

Between 1987 and 1990, Mark Breland became WBA welterweight champion, then he lost the title to Marlon Starling, then regained it, then lost it to Aaron Davis. Breland retired from the ring with an impressive 39 victories, 3 losses, and 1 draw.

Munduga’s head had been clobbered badly by Breland, he collapsed heavily to the floor. This fight, which is the most attached to Munduga, had virtually desrepaired and destroyed him. It took Munduga nearly six months to contest again. he admits that after this fight he was damaged, no longer himself, and he somewhat lost interest in boxing. In comparison, Uganda’s Mustapha Wasajja was never the same again after he ws knocked out by Michael Spinks; John “the Beast Mugabi” was never the same again when he was knocked out by Marvelous Marvin Hagler.

Next, in Las Vegas, he won in a mediocre fight with Alvaro Granillo in December 1986. His very last major fight was with undefeated Darrin “Schoolboy” Van Horn who was a student at the University of Kentucky, and a future International Boxing Federation (IBF) world champion. In Frankfort in Kentucky, more than a year since Munduga had performed in the ring, Van Horn knocked out Munduga in the seventh of a scheduled 10-rounder in February 1988.

Munduga fought his last three professional fights in Germany and Belgium, and he lost all of them by knockout to unheralded fighters. His last recorded fight is of November 1989. He had lost his luster. Munduga is recorded as having won in 25 fights in which 18 were by knockout. However in all the five fights that he lost, he was knocked out in each of them. Many had expected so much more from this formerly high-ranked boxer.

Between 1987 and 1990, Mark Breland became WBA welterweight champion, then he lost the title to Marlon Starling, then regained it, then lost it to Aaron Davis. Breland retired from the ring with an impressive 39 victories, 3 losses, and 1 draw.

Works Cited

AP. “Breland Wins 12th Welterweight Bout.” The Index Journal. May 16 1986.

AP. “Breland Floors Munduga in Sixth.” The Index Journal. June 22 1986.

Berger, Phil. “Mugabi: At Boxing’s Front Door.” New York Times. March 2 1986.

Although the FDA takes a neutral position on cell phone radiation our government has known of problems for some time. During the Cold War the American Embassy in Moscow was “micro-waved” by the Russian Embassy. The American ambassador became ill and was soon diagnosed with leukemia. His replacement also became ill and was diagnosed with leukemia. Embassy staff members became ill. After an investigation it was learned that low level frequencies, similar to that produced by a mobile phone, were responsible. Furthermore, after extensive study the U.S. Defense Intelligence Agency warned all of its personnel of risks from low-level radiation. (Just FYI, microwave radiation and cell phone radiation is basically the same thing.)

Consider a few facts about mobile phone radiation:

• Talking on a mobile phone 500 to 1000 minutes a month increases the probability of brain cancer by 300%
• Radiation from a mobile phone has been shown to damage or break DNA
• Radiation from mobile phones causes leakage of the blood-brain barrier
• Teenagers talk on cell phones an average of 2600 minutes a month
• Cell phone radiation is responsible for a 30% reduction in sperm count in men who carry cell phones on belt clips

Cell phone radiation is everywhere. In fact, the exposure to our children today is one hundred million times worse than the exposure of their grandparents. That’s not a good thing because the damage done by these phones can be worse for kids than adults. Children have softer bones, especially skull bones, allowing the radiation to penetrate deeper.

Just recently Europe’s top environmental watchdog group called for immediate action to reduce exposure to mobile phone radiation. The German government is also advising its people to avoid radiation from mobile phones by using wired connections instead of WiFi and to use landline phones instead. Understanding that cell phone radiation is a problem for kids, the British government advised parents to restrict their use to children over 12 years of age. The U.S. government remains silent. Sometimes money and politics are strong adversaries of truth.

Cell phones were the only radiation-emitting devices ever sold to the public without any pre-market safety testing. Does that trouble you?

And get this. So many people today are using these devices that you don’t have to personally own one to be exposed to mobile phone radiation. It’s like second-hand smoke. And since wireless information is now being beamed from satellites in space (how do you think a GPS device works?) there is no escaping its exposure anywhere on our planet.

For many years we were told that tobacco, lead and asbestos were safe. Many found out otherwise after it was too late. It’s time to understand what’s going on here. Cell phone radiation just might be the biggest toxin of this century. Let’s not be fooled again. Radiation roulette is not a game we want to play.

Lynn Quiring, RPh, CCN, NMD

lynnquiring@msn.com

http://www.cellphoneradiationalert.com

As a watch collector and amateur horologist, I’ve noticed one watch company flying under the radar, seemingly overlooked in the clutter of brand names. That company is Volmax, a Russian watch company headquartered in Moscow.

If you are thinking about buying a Breitling or Omega or other brand of pilot or aviator watch, I’d suggest taking a look at Volmax, especially if the prices of the big Swiss brands are making you hesitant.

Though you may not have heard of them, Volmax is not exactly new on the scene. The company was formed in 2000 when a group of experienced watch professionals took over the Poljot factory. Poljot was the most recognized and prestigious name in the history of Russian watchmaking. It could be said that Volmax has taken over where Poljot left off. Indeed, the company has a great pedigree.

Volmax watches are not marketed under the “Volmax” name. Instead, the company produces and markets several different lines. My favorite line of watches under the Volmax umbrella is Aviator, a brand strongly tied to Russia’s rich aviation history.

A good example of a watch in this line is the Hughes Aviator. It’s a classic “aviator” watch in the generic sense of the word. The watch was developed with a marketing tie-in to the movie “The Aviator”, the story of eccentric aviation pioneer Howard Hughes, which starred Leonardo DiCaprio.

The quality of Volmax watches is good and their performance compares favorably to many Swiss aviator-style chronographs — even though some models cost only one-third of the price.

Most Volmax watches are based on the Poljot 3133 chronograph movement, which has been produced since 1975. It’s a reliable, hand-wound movement that serves as the heart of the watch. Other models are equipped with Swiss ETA 2671 and ETA 7750 movements.

Cases for Aviator watches are made of stainless steel. You see, true pilot watches cannot be made of gold or other soft metals.

Another Volmax watch that might interest Omega buyers is the Shturmanskie. The name is a mouthfull, but did you know that the first man in space, cosmonaut Yuri Gagarin, wore a a Shturmanskie on the cuff of his space-suit during that historic flight?

The great Russian artist Varvara Fedorovna Stepanova (1894-1958) delved into to a wide range of artistic trends from Social realism to Symbolism. However, she is mostly known for exploring and furthering Constructivism.

New Abstract Art in Russia began around 1909 – some say, actual Constructivism started in 1919 when first mentioned by Rodchenko. The term was actually used by the Russian artists themselves. In some ways, it was influenced by Cubism, Italian/Russian Futurism and traditional peasant art. Constructivist artwork is characterized by abstract, geometric forms and a technique in which various materials, often industrial in nature, are assembled rather than carved or modeled.

Constructivism replaced traditional art with socially-instrumental art. Artists in this field invited their audiences to be active viewers of their artwork. In line with this vision, they were innovators in fine art painting; but also in 3-D constructed objects; typographic design including posters; textiles & fashion designs, furniture, and theater sets and costume design.

Constuctivist lead-playing artist Stepanova expressed her wide range of talents in all of these art outlets and media. For a long time, Varvara substituted her painting for production art. She worked with functional materials manufactured in an equal relationship between artist and industrial worker, with an objective to bring art into life.

Stepanova carried out her ideal of engaging with industrial production and designed comfortable clothing for ease of movement of workers. She used striking fabrics in geometric patterns that suited the industrial printing methods. Her modernist practicality combined with sophistication made her popular in Paris in the mid ’20s.

Even though from peasant origin, Varvara went to the Kazan School of Art in Odessa. There she met her live-long art collaborator and then future-husband, Alexander Rodchenko. She moved to Moscow in 1912 with Rodchenko to attend the Stroganov School.

Together Stepanova and Rodchenko became an important part of the Russian art avant-garde, both in terms of their collaborations, and each in their own right. For an example of a collaborative artwork with Rodchenko, is NYC’s Museum of Modern Art.* Both artists considered the artistic experience as public communication rather than a private introspection.

The couple was involved with many influential artists of that time. Before the Russian Revolution, around 1917, they shared an apartment with Wassily Kadinsky in Moscow, and were introduced to many other famous Russian artists.

In the earlier parts of her career, Varvara loved Futurist poetry. She autonomously developed what came to be known as ‘non-objective visual poetry’. An example of ‘non-objective visual poetry’ is featured at MoMA. It is called ‘Gaust chaba’, 1919. * This is watercolor manuscript text on found newspaper leaves.

Stepanova designed Cubo-Futurist artwork for use in artists’ books. This kind of artwork combines the Cubist use of forms. At the same time, it adopts the Futurists’ passionate loathing of ideas from the past, especially political and artistic traditions, and a love for action and technology. She participated in world-famous art shows, including the ‘Fifth State Exhibition’ & the ‘Tenth State Exhibition’ in 1919, and the ‘5×5 = 25 Exhibition’ in Moscow in 1921.

Many of her works feature figures who she displays as robotic, efficient and dynamic, i.e. new socialist human beings. In one of her most famous works ‘The Billiard Players’ Stepanova depicts mechanical action and emotional states simultaneously.

Even more than her husband’s work, Stepanova’s work in the 1920s epitomized the Russian Avant-Garde. Her constructivism flourished through the mid 1930s. From 1920 to 1925, Varvara taught at the Krupskaia Academy of Social Education.

* direct links to these artwork samples can be found at http://www.eArtfair.com

copyright A. Lee, 2008 – all rights reserved.