jjjveryness.com

From an Elvis Australia fan club interview with Nixon’s former White House Deputy for Domestic Affairs, Egil ‘Bud’ Krogh:

I thought, ‘Well, you know, this guy seems to be saying the things that that Richard Nixon would like to hear, so let’s see if we can’t set up a meeting’. So I wrote a memo to the president suggesting some talking points and, and Dwight Chapin wrote a memo to then-Chief of Staff Bob Haldeman, to get approval for this meeting. And it came back approved.
But anyway, we walked in a half an hour later into the Oval Office and the president got up. It was a little bit awkward at first, because I’m not sure that Elvis really believed that he was there. They had a really weird discussion about a lot of things that had nothing to do with the talking points I had written. Elvis was telling the president how difficult it was to play in Las Vegas. The president said, ‘I understand, Las Vegas is a tough town’. And then Elvis said, ‘And you know, the Beatles came over here and made a lot of money and said some un-American things’. And the president looked at me, like, ‘Well, what’s this about the Beatles?’
And then the real reason for the trip finally came out as Elvis said, ‘Mr. President, can you get me a badge from the Bureau of Narcotics and Dangerous Drugs?’ And the president looked and he said, ‘Bud, can we get him a badge?’ And I said, ‘Well, Mr. President, if you want to get him a badge, we can do that’. He said, ‘Well, get him a badge’.

The whole article is worth a read. This is also a good time to revisit the best use of Elvis music in the last decade.

From BBC:

Tran Trong Duyet - a sprightly retiree and amateur ballroom dancer - must rank as one of John McCain’s more unlikely supporters.
Four decades ago, during the Vietnam war, Mr Duyet was in charge of the notorious Hoa Lo prison - the place where Mr McCain says he was brutally beaten and tortured during five-and-a-half years as an American prisoner of war.
…
“But I can confirm to you that we never tortured him. We never tortured any prisoners.”

It’s to our enduring shame that America has engaged in torture, and even more disgraceful that we’ve claimed actions we call torture acceptable when we practice them.

But as John McCain has rightly asserted many times, he was tortured. Unfortunately, some of the same techniques used to torture Senator McCain have been used by the US to torture. We are a torturing nation. There’s no way to parse or equivocate that. Though it seems likely most of the people responsible won’t be tried by the US anytime soon, the rest of the world may not be so lenient. The shred of redemption in this escapade is that various leaders within the American community can use this opportunity to dust off truths we’ve let languish too long and own them again, like my pastor did in an op/ed for the Orlando Sentinel:

• The Golden Rule: The U.S. will not use any method of interrogation that we would not find acceptable if used against Americans.
• One national standard: We will adopt a single standard for interrogation across U.S. agencies and departments.
• Rule of law: The U.S. will acknowledge all prisoners to our courts and the International Committee of the Red Cross and provide fully adequate judicial processes to provide detainees an opportunity to prove their innocence.
• Duty to protect: The U.S. will not transfer prisoners in our custody to governments when there is a likelihood that they will be tortured.
• Checks and balances: The U.S. will reaffirm the legitimate role of the legislative and judicial branches in understanding, reviewing, and in some cases setting detention policies.
• Clarity and accountability: All U.S. personnel deserve the certainty that they are implementing policy that complies fully with the Geneva Conventions and U.S. law.

Unfortunately America’s reputation will likely further suffer before it can begin recovering, with so many more stories coming to light (like our alleged secret prison ships in international waters used as torture house).

From ProPublica:

An Arab-language television network and radio station, founded by the Bush administration to promote a positive image of the United States, has aired anti-American and anti-Israeli viewpoints, has showcased pro-Iranian policies and recently gave air time to a militant who called for the death of American soldiers in Iraq.

So far, U.S. taxpayers have spent nearly $500 million to fund those broadcasts. The television station, called Alhurra, and the radio network, Sawa, were meant to provide an American perspective on world events and counter the wave of global criticism that had been building against the Bush administration since the invasion of Iraq in 2003.

…

During a visit to Alhurra’s studios in June, reporters, producers, cameramen and technical staff were busy preparing broadcasts for an audience half-way around the world. Conniff, who is the president of Alhurra and Radio Sawa, sat in on a morning editorial meeting but could not understand it – his Middle Eastern staff discussed the day’s stories in Arabic and no one offered Conniff a simultaneous translation.

“There is no adult supervision there by people who know what is on the actual broadcasts,” said William Rugh, who served as U.S. Ambassador in Yemen and the United Arab Emirates. “You need bilingual managers who understand both languages and cultures and understand journalism.”

Financial accountability also appears to be lacking. In its four years, the network has been unable to provide full documentation to auditors to account for its spending, according to two people familiar with the records and a 2006 report by the Government Accountability Office.

Is there any other time when a $.5b waste of money would be largely ignored by the American public? Especially when that waste involves inadvertently airing calls for death to American soldiers? It’s a testament to the absolutely lack of confidence we have in American government that at this point stories like this just seem like business as usual.

From the NY Times op/ed section:

Campaigns generate headlines with the tough decisions they make. On Thursday, Barack Obama’s campaign made waves with an easy one. Mr. Obama’s decision to leave the public financing system elicited the predictable outrage among reformers (and the McCain camp), but it was probably the most obvious and inevitable decision he’ll make all year — justified both politically and ethically.

By freeing his campaign from the public system, Mr. Obama can continue to raise donations from his vast base of supporters, who have made his campaign thus far the best-financed in history. Mr. Obama is rightly counting on them to raise far more than the $84 million in public funds he could expect to receive from public financing.

Mr. Obama may be on slippery ground because of his previous commitment to stick with the public system. But given that his campaign essentially embodies the ideals of reform — to a degree no one seriously thought possible just a few years ago — it’s going to be difficult for the McCain campaign or the chorus of scolds to generate much traction on the issue. After all, Mr. Obama’s all but certain financial advantage in the campaign will be derived from donors of modest means — not wealthy vested interests.

Obama left the publicly funding election system for a system funded by the public. There are two chief complaints; that he said he would work with the Republican nominee to have a fairly funded fight and now he’s breaking his word, and that this sets a dangerous precedent. Obama has disingenuously claimed his reason for leaving is to level the playing field since history the Republican camp have used “527 groups” — third-party political groups that aren’t allowed to coordinate their efforts with the campaign, but are freed from all other financial limits. (The most famous being the Swift Boat Veterans for Truth that ran a smear campaign against John Kerry in 2004 campaign.) The reality is that the Republicans haven’t really deployed any 527s this cycle, though they may, and the better and more honest reason would simply be that Obama would be foolish to turn down the likely hundreds of millions of dollars from small donors he’s likely to get.

In an ironic twist, John McCain who has been loudly complaining about Obama’s lack of ethics is actually violating federal election law during this primary season. He opted into the public system to guarantee a loan, then backed out of the public system without permission which is illegal. The Federal Election Commission is currently without enough members to vote on the matter, but the chairman (a Republican) has denounced McCain’s action and improper already.

So what does this all mean? Obama will campaign hard in more states than any other candidate ever has, and will campaign in every state in the union, which no one has ever done. He’ll do so in the faint shadow of his questionable reasoning, while McCain will continue to spend until the Republican National Convention money he is legally barred from spending. After the RNC, he’ll be limited to the $84m and whatever the independent 527s want to invest on their own advertising.

This also means that somewhere between $200m-$400m will be spent on the campaigning for this election, on top of the countless millions already spent. Ad into that what the various networks have spent on their staff, ad revenue, etc and we have an election cost escalating far beyond more countries’ GDP. The race of the president of the United States is certainly important, but that seems an obscene amount of money in light of the cheap costs dent poverty, disease or illiteracy around the world.

Image courtesy Jay D on Flickr.

The Big Picture has been generating buzz and adoration since its launch May 21. But until today I didn’t realize that the site was more than just a blurb and a giant photo. Clicking into any of the link and you get a deep resource of large photos - the kind newspaper can’t afford to make room for.
This isn’t just valuable for aesthetic reasons, though there’s irrefutable beauty in these images. It’s also valuable for the context it provides, and the balance in reported; Newspapers are very limited in the coverage they can offer, and if a picture is worth a thousand words then no column would ever have the room do fully do justice to the Ethopian food crisis, the present situation in Sadr City or the Euro Cup.

Photo of a boy carrying plastic toy weapons, approaching a U.S. Soldier of 1-6 battalion, 2nd brigade, 1st Armored Division patroling in the Shiite enclave of Sadr city, Baghdad, Iraq, on Monday, June 16, 2008. (AP Photo/Petros Giannakouris)

From the NY Times:

American and Southwest are washing a handful of jet engines each night, a process that used to happen only during thorough maintenance overhauls. Southwest figures it has already saved $1.6 million in fuel costs since April by reducing the drag caused by dirt and debris.

The efforts of the airline industry to increase fuel efficiency are laudable, though it’s a pity they weren’t more efficient to start with. But what works to reduce energy overhead for the airline industry may not work for another industry in crisis because of spiraling fuel costs; the trucking industry.

What does work for both industries is traveling slower. Slower travel takes longer, but can drastically increase mileage and decrease the costs far beyond what the slower transport adds to the bottom line. I drove from Virginia to Florida on Sunday, covering 800 miles. Nearly every one of the trucks - and there were fewer trucks on the highway than I have ever seen - was driving at or below the speed limit.

So what’s the next step for trucks looking for better mileage? I predict aerodynamic exoskeletons. Or that the shipping industry will start focusing on rail again, where the energy efficiency is substantially higher that by truck.

From the Washington Post:

D.C. police began checking drivers’ IDs last night in a neighborhood that has been plagued by homicide, and although the policy found critics, among them at least one motorist, a police official said it went well.

…

But [Herbert Temoney] was skeptical, stating that stopping motorists at checkpoints may not be an adequate response to the killings.

…

“They’re out here putting tickets on cars of residents when they should be out here walking around getting to know the neighborhood and learning who lives here and who doesn’t,” said Diane Kemp, a 16-year resident of the area who was ticketed a few months ago.

“Now we have checkpoints, one more way of hurting those of us who live here.”

Representatives of several civil and housing rights organizations protested the plan as they gathered in the 1400 block of Montello Avenue NE. Eleanor Johnson, of the D.C. Coalition for Housing Justice, said the police were “creating a police state.”

About 15 demonstrators decried the checkpoints, saying they violate the residents’ rights. “Trinidad, yes; Baghdad, no!” they yelled. “Don’t turn Trinidad into Baghdad!“

If DC is serious about reducing crime, why not start foot patrols? There’s a wealth of information supporting the increased effectiveness of foot patrol as a crime deterrent and effective social policy.

Foreign Policy has an interesting guide on tourist destinations that Americans can’t visit. They mention Mount Kumgang, Baracoa, Mogadishu’s Beaches, Persepolis, and Mandalay. Respecively North Korea, Cuba, Somalia, Iran and Burma.

Of course, no one from any of those countries would be allowed to enjoy the Grand Canyon, or the Big Apple. In fact, even Iraqi translators working at enormous personal risk with the US military in Iraq can’t get visas to travel here. Like the Gonzaga basketball prospect born in Sudan who was refused entry into the US, Iraqi translators come from a country our government has short-listed as undesirable. In fact, there are only 27 countries allowed to visit the US’ tourist splendors without visa of their own; mostly European nations like England or Italy. Unfortunately even citizens of those nations can be in for US travel problems. One Italian lawyer was recently locked up without lawyer or trial for ten days on a recent visit for audaciously traveling to the US visit his American girlfriend, and eventually the Grand Canyon.

From the LA Times:

Restaurants, fast-food chains and supermarkets across Southern California removed fresh red Roma, plum and red round tomatoes from their shelves and took them off their menus this weekend as the U.S. government warned of a widening outbreak of salmonella.

The Food and Drug Administration said consumers should avoid raw red plum, red Roma or round red tomatoes, which have been tied to 145 infections reported since mid-April.

I drove 1600 miles this weekend on a trip marked by dining, of both the fine and fast categories. The lack of tomatoes across all spectrums of dining was noticeable. What’s curious is the scope of the tomato shortage, given the nature of the problem. For the sake of 145 illnesses, with 23 hospitalizations, many restaurants stopped serving tomatoes and many grocers halted sales of at least thee kinds of tomatoes. Given the enormous quantity of American consumption, and the food and feed shortage we’re facing on a global scale, it seems puzzling that we’d destroy food. Granted people are getting sick enough to require medical care, but other people are dying of starvation. Destroying a large supply of any food would seem an act of imprudence, likely driving up already high food costs and increasing the likelihood of starvation-related deaths worldwide.

Photo courtesy Junjan at Flickr.

From CNN:

The man who designed the Pringles potato chip packaging system was so proud of his accomplishment that a portion of his ashes has been buried in one of the iconic cans.

…

Baur’s children said they honored his request to bury him in one of the cans by placing part of his cremated remains in a Pringles container in his grave in suburban Springfield Township.

What can’t Pringles’ cans do? Extend your wi-fi? Check. Work as a lens extender for budding photographers? Done.

Serving as a final resting place was the obvious next step for the Pringles can.

Image from Flickr, courtesy Kevin+Photo.