Pivot Point on Waterboarding

(Via Glenn)

Is waterboarding torture?

Well, according to the John F. Kennedy School of Government, it depends on when you ask (emphasis added):

Examining the four newspapers with the highest daily circulation in the country, we found a significant and sudden shift in how newspapers characterized waterboarding. From the early 1930s until the modern story broke in 2004, the newspapers that covered waterboarding almost uniformly called the practice torture or implied it was torture: The New York Times characterized it thus in 81.5% (44 of 54) of articles on the subject and The Los Angeles Times did so in 96.3% of articles (26 of 27). By contrast, from 2002‐2008, the studied newspapers almost never referred to waterboarding as torture. The New York Times called waterboarding torture or implied it was torture in just 2 of 143 articles (1.4%). The Los Angeles Times did so in 4.8% of articles (3 of 63). The Wall Street Journal characterized the practice as torture in just 1 of 63 articles (1.6%). USA Today never called waterboarding torture or implied it was torture. In addition, the newspapers are much more likely to call waterboarding torture if a country other than the United States is the perpetrator. In The New York Times, 85.8% of articles (28 of 33) that dealt with a country other than the United States using waterboarding called it torture or implied it was torture while oly 7.69% (16 of 208) did so when the United States was responsible. The Los Angeles Times characterized the practice as torture in 91.3% of articles (21 of 23) when another country was the violator, but in only 11.4% of articles (9 of 79) when the United States was the perpetrator.

Nice.

AIG: Wall Street's Cookie Jar

The NYT informs us that the AIG mess is (once again) worse than previously thought.

We know that

• AIG irresponsibly covered Wall Street's bets
• Those same bets blew up - demolishing AIG's balance sheet
• The government took over AIG, ostensibly to save our financial system from imploding
• The newly federalized - AIG covered 100% of Wall Street's bets using federal money, despite the fact that pre-takeover AIG was telling Wall Street they'd have to take significant losses
• AIG with help from the NY Fed and the S.E.C. delayed disclosure of these payments to the public.

And now, thanks to the NYT - we learn that as part of the federal bailout deal, AIG agreed to waive its right to sue Wall Street banks over the CDS bets it paid out - using the magical phrase "by reason of any matter, cause or thing occurring from the beginning for the world to the Termination Date that arises out of or in any way relates to the CDS Transactions."

AIG before the fed takeover was acting like a business that had done something stupid - negotiating with the banks, and trying to save its own hide.

AIG after the fed takeover was acting like a business whose only concern was to save Wall Street banks - and shield them from public scrutiny.

(H/t Felix Salmon)

Taibbi vs. Logan (vs. Hastings (vs. McChrystal))

So Rolling Stone's Michael Hastings takes out Gen. McChrystal by reporting what he said.

CBS' Lara Logan goes off on Hastings' credidibility, methods and ethics.

And Matt Taibbi positively beats the crap out of her for doing so.

Hey, assholes: you do not work for the people you're covering!... People like George Bush, John McCain, Barack Obama, and General McChrystal for that matter, they can afford to buy their own P.R. — and they do, in ways both honest and dishonest, visible and invisible.

They don't need your help, and you're giving it to them anyway, because you just want to be part of the club so so badly. Disgustingly, that's really what it comes down to. Most of these reporters just want to be inside the ropeline so badly, they want to be able to say they had that beer with Hillary Clinton in a bowling alley in Scranton or whatever, that it colors their whole worldview. God forbid some important person think you're not playing for the right team!...

By the severely unlikely virtue of a drunken accident we get a tiny glimpse of an answer to some...vital questions, but instead of cheering this as a great break for our profession, a waytago moment, one so-called reputable journalist after another lines up to protest the leak and attack the reporter for doing his job. God, do you all suck!

Yes, I loves the snark... but my gut is with Taibbi on this one. A reporter who has a story should run it, and self censorship in the name of "this would embarrass the troops" is not any kind of journalism.

(H/t CJR)

Commensurate With The Threat

(Via Newshoggers)

Found this interesting - via Thoreau (not that one, this one):

The feds have arrested 10 people charged with spying for Russia. I do not know the validity of the evidence, so I cannot comment on that. I can, however, note that these people were charged with crimes in a court of law.

Now, charging people with crimes in an open court of law is perfectly fine if we’re merely talking about people accused of acting at the behest of a nuclear power with a global intelligence network, a navy and airforce, oil, natural resources with which they play politics with neighbors, and a $1.2 trillion GDP. Sure, they may have some resources behind them, but at least the threat is manageable.

On the other hand, if we’re talking about a small network of guerrilla fighters whose leader lives in caves and whose fighters are armed with at best shoulder-mounted rocket launchers, well, you simply cannot charge them in an open court. The risks are far too great.

He shoots, he scores.

Misery is just a down payment on tomorrow's victory

Scoreline - June 26, 2010
USA: 1
Donovan 62' pk
Ghana: 2
Boateng 5'; Gyan 93'

So it's over.

Another two-year campaign brought to a halt (again) by the land of the warrior kings. This time, there was no bogus penalty or missed call. Just a Ghanaian team who managed to be brilliant precisely when we at our worst.

Were this like prior years, this would be where I would lament the lot of US soccer. Say something about how this nation would ignore its team's ascent - tuning in only immediately prior to their fall.

But that's not what happened this time. Yeah, we got some bad calls, but we won our group - in spectacular (if only by the skin of our teeth) fashion. Only 16 teams in the world got to where we did

- and unlike every other World Cup we've been in, the US was actually paying attention.

Here are US fans around the world, watching Donovan put in the winning goal against Algeria:



How rock-hard awesome is that?

American soccer fans watching their team win - and going ape. That is the greatest World Cup highlight for me. And it has been a long time coming.

There will time to second guess the decision to start Onyewu or Clark - or to not start Feilhaber - but US soccer fans can go away from a tournament knowing they were not robbed - and they can expect to return with a stronger team.

Financial Reform? Hah. Drilling Moratorium? Double Hah.

An agreement on financial "reform" is reached in Congress - mainly they agree that they should pass something that the banks don't dislike too much.

WaPo "Financial overhaul leaves Wall Street mainly intact. Bill does not break up the nation’s largest firms; ”Volcker rule” on derivatives was softened in response to lobbying from banks."

For a complete breakdown/takedown of the bill, read Barry

Oh, and BP has found an innovative way to drill underwater AND reach artic oil - in one fell swoop: Build an island and drill sideways.

Weak.

WC Bracket for 2010

Once again, spoiler alert - if you're recording anything do not scroll down.
























And then there were 16...

Were the universe to follow my directions, it would all unfold thusly:

Knowing my history of predictions - it will look nothing like this. But then - at least I wasn't stupid enough to say Serbia was going to make it into the final (or put Italy and France in the quarter finals) I mean, what idiot algorithm made that prediction?)

Monster Hunting With Your iPhone

Okay, this is a seriously cool idea.

Walruses and Seals

The Boy's birthday is imminent, so my mom had sent up her usual dose of birthday duds and knicknacks. True to form - she'd send stuff for little E as well - so both kids were tearing up the boxes and having a good time.

Two odd items stuck out - litte E's box included two stuffed animals - a walrus and a seal. These stuck out mostly because there was no equivalent item in the Boy's box.

Mom pressed the point by asking us to guess the significance of the two.

As I'll be headed to Norway soon - my first guess was these were animals you could find in Norway. But no.

Mom winged me the correct answer this morning.

BP's 583-page Gulf [disaster] plan, last updated in June 2009, included references to how to protect walruses and sea lions, which, as Energy and Environment subcommittee chair Ed Markey (D-Mass.) noted, "have not called the Gulf [of Mexico] home for 3 million years." The plan also included the phone number of a sea turtle expert who has been dead for five years.

And it gets even worse: The other four oil giants are using almost the exact same plans.

In yesterday's hearing, representatives brought out the emergency response plans of Shell, ConocoPhillips, Chevron, ExxonMobil, and BP that had been drafted in case of an oil spill in the region. The cover photos of rigs and tankers are identical, just in different colors, and four of the five plans include the references to walruses, sea lions, seals, and sea turtle expert Dr. Peter Lutz. They list him as a staff member of the University of Miami, though he hadn't worked there since 1991, when he left for Florida Atlantic University. Oh, and he passed away in February 2005, so he probably wouldn't be able to offer much help now anyway.

"ExxonMobil, Chevron, ConocoPhillips, and Shell are as unprepared as BP," said Henry Waxman (D-Calif.), who called the responses "cookie cutter" plans. "When you look at the details, it becomes evident these [response] plans are just paper exercises."

Markey summed up the companies' response strategies pretty well in Tuesday's hearing: "The only technology you seem to be relying on is the Xerox machine."

Lovely.

11 Hours, 5 minutes and 215 aces

It's over - the longest tennis match in history - bar none.

John Isner finally broke Nicholas Mahut's serve to prevail in the 138th game of the fifth set.

Guess which one of these men won only 68 of those games?

Well, That Would Explain It...

June 1: Al Gore and Tipper Gore announce their impending separation

June 3: A police report is filed in Oregon concluding an investigation into an alleged sexual assault of a massage therapist by Al Gore.

(H/t Pundette)

Late Edit: Here's TPM with more detail.

Protecting Their Assets

(Via CJR)

Here's a great example of government in action, courtesy of Bloomberg's Jonathan Weil:

Crime didn’t pay for Joseph Collins, a former corporate lawyer who received a seven-year prison sentence in January for securities fraud. It just has cost him a lot less money than it should have.

Collins, a former partner at the law firm Mayer Brown LLP, was the chief outside counsel for Refco Inc. when the futures- trading firm collapsed in October 2005, two months after its initial public offering. He was convicted last July on five felony counts for helping Refco executives fleece the company’s investors and lenders of $2.4 billion. Yet Collins, 60, hasn’t been forced to pay compensation to anyone who lost money when Refco went bust.

That’s mainly because Congress has made sure only the government has the right to bring civil court claims against defendants for aiding and abetting securities fraud. Private litigants are barred from doing so under federal law. That means outside investors typically have no means to seek redress in such cases, unless prosecutors or regulators choose to pursue restitution for them. As for the Collins case, the government has proved worthless in that respect.

That translates into the government pre-empting investors rights to sue those who mismanaged their investment bad enough to go to prison.

Because the S.E.C. is going to exact civil penalties. And so they did:

[Collins'] deal [with the S.E.C.] included no monetary penalties. His only punishment was a court order barring him from violating the securities laws’ anti-fraud provisions in the future. He also was allowed to settle the suit without admitting or denying the SEC’s allegations, an absurd formality considering he’s already been found guilty of a crime.

Read the whole article. Makes you rethink the whole "equal under the law" thing.

Owch.

Bring on the Rotten Tomatoes

Spoiler alert - if you're recording the World Cup - turn away now.

Arrivederci!

Iaquinta ponders emigrating to a country that has no television.

The Slovaks kick some Azzuri butt, in commanding fashion. Vittek bashes in two, and the Azzuri realize late (as ever) that doing the bare minimum in group play is a strategy that can bite you in game 3.



Behold, the output of Group F:

I'm thinkin' some people's brackets just took it in the chops.

Heart Stopper

Donovan: USA's Captain Fantastic

You can't make this sh!t up.

Three minutes from total catastrophe.

All kinds of pressure, no kind of luck -

and Landon Donovan puts us over the top.

The USA win their group and advance to the second round.

We get Germany, Serbia or Ghana.

Adding up the if's could break a person.

If Robert Green wasn't such a feeb...

If Donovan doesn't score early in the second half of the Slovenia match...

If Bradley skies his shot 36 minutes later...

If Djebbour's 5th minute volley goes under the bar, instead of caroming off it...

and of course, if Donovan hadn't buried the 6 yard rebound with 180 seconds to go.

I need a drink.

Go USA

Useless Carcass of Steel

The NYT has a full on awesome account of the Deepwater Horizon disaster that digs into the industry's belief in the Blow Out Preventer.

Needless to say, the article demonstrates this faith was misplaced.

There Are No Minnows

Bradley delivers us from our own stupidity.

Paraguay draws with Italy.
Mexico manhandles France.
Germany goes down to Serbia.
Spain goes down to Switzerland.
Slovenia goes 2 up on the US before we rally to a tie.
And Algeria hold England to a scoreless draw.

After the cheering for the valiant comeback of the US fades, we will be left with the sad reality that for the bulk of the game we played like total crap.

"Early goals" will once again be offered as an explanation - and a lot of teeth will be gnashed over the fact we had a goal disallowed.

But early goals come from the same source that late goals do: poor defense, inspired offense or a combination of the two.

Our back line were terrible and our midfield... seriously, where they hell did they go? Vs. England they were at least a reason to smile. They showed real aggression and prevented more than a few breakouts by the English.

But vs. Slovenia?

We didn't build through the midfield - we didn't build. We just booted the ball long and desperate and more often than not - lost possession.

Watching a team like Barcelona - it is uncanny how a desperate defensive boot finds its way to a teammate who not only keeps possession - but has passing options for building an attack.

With the US, the ball goes off into green space where it is swiftly gobbled up by another attacker - and the US turns to defend again.

Worse, the same result happens when we have a goal kick. Total freedom to build from the back and Howard makes what is arguably the world's longest turnover.

Again and again.

I get that we were down and had to rush, but our attack has not been built on big-man-nods-the-long-ball-down play.

Altidore got it done with Bradley for the second goal, and good on both of them, but let's remember how many times Jozy came up empty - and how many possessions came to nothing before the 82nd freaking minute payoff.

I don't doubt Jozy's commitment or workrate - but I'd argue he's better when he's part of a coordinated group of attackers. Not that piss poor long ball crap we bet the farm on today.

The other big takeway from today? Landon Donovan: Stud. That picture perfect goal to open the 2nd half was the mark of a man who knows his business. Took the ball, stepped up, saw daylight and buried it.

Rock on. That was the future of the US World Cup right there. He lays that off like a traditional US player, we're nowhere and desperate for a lot longer.

Forget the whining about the bad call - forget our comeback, even. If we'd played worth a crap we'd have never gone down 2 in the first place.

I still don't get why the US needs to be terrified and desperate before they realize they are a professional soccer team. It's such madness to talk about how they've matured.

I'm sure I'm not the only one who remembers 2002 - how a playing-for-pride-Poland almost sent us home with three goals in our backside. How we had to have South Korea gift us a ticket to the round of 16.

We keep screwing up the basics and we have no guarantees that we'll be able to beat an Algeria squad that managed something we couldn't: keep a clean sheet against England.

The boosters like Lalas "We should win 2-0" need to start viewing every opponent like demons from hell. This is the World freaking Cup - there are no easy points and the sooner we realize that, the sooner we might become a serious team.

Go USA.

Easily The Strangest Sentence You'll Read Today

Courtesy of the BBC:

A German student "mooned" a group of Hell's Angels and hurled a puppy at them before escaping on a stolen bulldozer, police have said.

Looks Like We're Staying in Afghanistan...

U.S. Discovers Stunning Mineral Reserves in Afghanistan 

The New York Times says U.S. officials believe the vast veins of iron, copper, cobalt, gold, lithium, and niobium could "fundamentally alter" the Afghan economy and perhaps the Afghan war.  U.S. officials told the newspaper Afghanistan could eventually be transformed into one of the "most important mining centers in the world." 

Média Horizonte

Robert Green: Totally walking back to England

Say this for the Americans - we're not boring.

Infuriating, inspiring or incompetent - there's always a reason to yell.

Scoreline - June 12, 2010
USA: 1
Dempsey 40'
England: 1
Gerrard 4'

There's a lot of cheering at how the US wasn't demolished by England - how we showed real spirit.

Demerit shut down Rooney...Altidore could have won it... blah blah blah...

Look, I'm as happy as the next yank - but you have to look at what happened. Yet again, the US gets a point only by the grace of the soccer gods. And let's review... Soccer gods? A$$holes The only reason Green tanked on Dempsey's shot was because England is higher up on their sh!tlist than we were. Our time will come again - and the US is providing way too many vectors for a crushing takedown.

Exhibit A was the US defense. We were a surging bunch of madmen in midfield, but as soon as the ball got within 30 yards, we suddenly become a bunch of ball-watching tools. Yes, Howard was a stud in the net - but he had to be. England was getting all kinds of through balls on our left side, and but for Heskey's case of the goal pox we'd have lost this game by 2.

I loved watching our domination of the midfield - we never owned England, and we didn't get more possession - but it was so gratifying to see pass after pass get hacked off by Clark or Cherundolo. Great stuff. If we'd have been able to stomp on stuff like that in our own third as well - we might have had something.

But no, we had Lennon and Johnson shredding us practically at will - if they got through midfield. A lot of buzz is going around about Demerit shutting down Rooney, but Rooney was drawing attention and giving some great balls through to the English attack. I'd rather have him doing that than surging into our net - but we didn't shut him off. Rooney was dialing up his influence late in the game. If he'd have had 20 more minutes, I think he could have buried us.

Onyewu didn't feeb - but he didn't impress me much. Cherundolo was a maniac, and much as I've been slagging on Donovan - you can't deny the man was a building force for the US.

We have a good chance to clear the group now, I don't see us doing well in the knockout round - we're just too sloppy in the back, but hell this is soccer. Perhaps the soccer gods will dick with us by letting us live a bit longer.

Go USA.

Dude, I Feel Old

Mom just sent me an email....


...from her new iPhone.

Ow.

There's A Shortage of Tweets in Farsi

Foreign Policy craps all over the idea that Iran experienced anything like a "Twitter Revolution."

(H/t TPM)

America's Finest News Source Bags Another Scoop

Behold, the Onion's latest masterpiece:

Massive Flow Of Bullshit Continues To Gush From BP Headquarters

The AT&T Experience

Since I went to electronic bill pay - my finances have gotten a lot easier to keep track of. Virtually all of my vendors can be switched to my credit card for automatic payment.

I have four that can't - so I have a monthly reminder to log into their sites and view my statements - then I schedule my payments and forget about them for another month.

Yes, I could allow these vendors to simply draw on my accounts automatically but there are good reasons why I don't do this.

1 of them doesn't have this capability
1 of them is my credit card company. Since a lot of other bills get routed there - it makes a lot of sense to be on top of this bill so I can keep abreast of what is going on.
1 is the cable company. As all cable companies are b@stards - I don't allow them anywhere near my accounts.

The last is AT & (effing) T.

They are also a manual pay vendor, since there's no way to trust them.

But AT&T apparently isn't content with merely being untrustworthy - they go the extra mile to bollocks things up.

This month's reminder arrives and I log into AT&T's website and see an amount that is 60 dollars more than usual.

Naturally, I have questions about this. Clicking on the bill detail - I'm given a message that says the detail for this bill is not yet available.

Great. AT&T knows I owe them X amount of dollars, yet is unable to itemize it.

The due date is still weeks out, so I figure I'm just ahead of their system and log out. I'll try in a few days.

A few days later, I get an email that says this:

Now, in that message are two things I don't like: A bill amount that is more than usual - and a snarky message telling me to pay my past due amount immediately next to a due date that is weeks away.

Sure, I might have screwed up, so I need to see the bill detail - which is apparently ready to view.

Great

I hit their website, log in and...

When we said your bill was ready, we didn't mean you could see it..

Yes, I'm sure their billing dept isn't coordinated with whatever technical glitch spawned this message - but still. Settling my bill is a matter of some urgency for me - and AT&T is making this take days.

Yes, I could call them - but if I've learned one thing about AT&T in the two years I've been a customer it's this:

If you have a problem with the phone company- the absolute worst thing you can do is call them.

As AT&T goes, this is a rather small issue - but consider: I was ready to pay before they nagged me. I was especially ready to pay after they nagged me.

And now I'll wait.

Again.

BP's Do-over

The WSJ has a solid graphic about the latest tactic BP is trying on the Deepwater Horizon blowout:

Oh, and the MMS exempted all drilling in the western and central Gulf of Mexico from having to make environmental assessments.

Yes, you heard that right.

(H/t Propublica)

Rudyard Griffiths on BP: What about all the wells that didn't have a blowout?

You have to love this guy. Rudyard Griffiths interviews Felix Salmon on the BP mess. When faced with a total catastrophe where BP is unquestionably to blame, Griffiths bravely stands up for the oppressed oil industry:

Felix Salmon: ...it doesn't make sense to blame the government for the oil spill unless you're blaming government for not regulating enough.

Rudyard Griffiths: But, Felix c'mon. I mean, let's be a little bit fairer to what has been a fairly good record of corporate stewardship up to this point in the Gulf. I mean we're talking 32,000 wells operating in that area. Yes, a tragic, a horrific accident that we're dealing with now, but y'know is there a sense of overreach here where the media, y'know just feeds on those images of the oil pumping out into the sea and suddenly, y'know the heavy hand of government y'know clasps around the throat of a not unimportant part of an American industry that's crucial to their energy security?

Felix Salmon: I don't know what throat you're talking about here. The fact is...the question is how many layers of safeguards do you have on these wells? How certain can you be that they will not fail?

Rudyard Griffiths: Well, 1 out of 32,000 ain't too bad

Felix Salmon: Well, it looks quite bad to me. The fact is that 1 out of 32,000 is one too many, and if there is a 1 out of 32,000 chance of this happening - then you shouldn't have 32,000 wells.

Rudyard Griffiths: Airlines crash, unfortunately airliners crash every month somewhere in the world - hundreds of people die horribly. But we don't ban the airline industry. Y'know, in other words accidents unfortunately happen.

Felix Salmon: I don't think we're banning undersea drilling either.

1 out of 32,000 is clearly one too many, as Mr. Salmon points out. This is the worst oil spill in US history - don't try to act like it is offset by the fact that another well hasn't had a similar catastrophe.

Not only that - but, it's a weak argument to point out all the wells that haven't blown up and sunk when all of these wells are not equal. Wells that operate a mile below the surface clearly pose a greater risk than those who are merely a few dozen yards underwater. The success of simpler procedures isn't a guarantee that more complicated procedures will be safe. Neither do those successful wells offer much in the way of options when a well in deep water blows up.

Take the airline analogy into this logic: Say an airline decides to save money by packing its aircraft to the gills with people and carrying the bare minimum of fuel to arrive at their destination. This ups the consequences of a disaster (more lives per plane) and increases the likelihood of a disaster (less fuel = less options like diverting in case of trouble).

Eventually this policy will result in a catastrophe. In Griffiths' world, we'd ban the airlines - but in the real world, we'd add regulation that set a maximum number of passengers and required planes to carry additional fuel.

Mr. Griffiths? Nice try - but you sound like a total idiot.