Who Will Benefit Most From Vote By Mail?

Who Will Benefit Most From Vote By Mail

 

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment

Hello world!

Welcome to WordPress.com. This is your first post. Edit or delete it and start blogging!

Posted in Uncategorized | 1 Comment

Vaccination of chickens can actually spread the flu virus.

China’s plans to vaccinate billions of chickens against avian flu could backfire and end up spreading the disease, poultry and vaccine experts warned last week.
 
 
So, here I thought the right thing for hte US to do to protect us is to help Vietnam, China, Indonesia, etc. vaccinate their birds (chickens an ducks) with a vaccine that we already have that really works.
So, I’m a pretty smart guy and try to weigh the evidence before I say these things, but the world is just too complicated.  My helpful recommendation could turn out to be a real disaster, as this article vividly points out.  Not only do you have to vaccinate billions of birds, since billions get eaten all the time you have to re-vaccinate the new chicks at an incredible rate; and you have to wear goggles and shoe covers and throw away clothes or you carry the virus form place to place and actually spread the disease.
So China is going to try to do it  and I really hope it is mainly effective.  With all the people they have and bureaucratic controls, they can do it if anyone can — and probably not even they can do it.  Vietnam is hopeless  … fuggeddaboudit!!!
 
So best intentions once again go astray and paradoxically make things worse!
Advertisement
Posted in Games | Leave a comment

Time Inc.’s top editor says the rule of law trumps the promise of confidentiality.

In surrendering a reporter’s notes, Time Inc.’s top editor says the rule of law trumps the promise of confidentiality. Where does journalism go from here?
By BILL SAPORITO

ALSO IN THIS ISSUE
Jul. 11, 2005

Table of Contents »
Photos and Graphics »
 
Posted in News and politics | Leave a comment

Striking of a proper balance between freedom of the press and the obligation of all citizens to give relevant testimony with respect to criminal conduct

Leonard Downie Jr.:  Any time a reporter enters into a confidential source relationship, it must not be violated, no matter what the source’s motive may be.
 
Under what conditions can and should a confidential source relationship be broken; or is it truly "never!"
 

In Branzburg (1972) Powell proceeded to describe the proper framework for determining

whether, pursuant to the rule adopted by the Branzburg majority, a

given reporter can be compelled to appear and give testimony before

a grand jury:

 

"[I]f the newsman is called upon to give information

bearing only a remote and tenuous relationship to the

subject of the investigation, or if he has some other

reason to believe that his testimony implicates

confidential source relationship without a legitimate

need of law enforcement, he will have access to the court

on a motion to quash and an appropriate protective order

may be entered. The asserted claim to privilege should

be judged on its facts by the striking of a proper

balance between freedom of the press and the obligation

of all citizens to give relevant testimony with respect

to criminal conduct. The balance of these vital

constitutional and societal interests on a case-by-case

basis accords with the tried and traditional way of

adjudicating such questions."

 

What this does not address is Woodward’s responsibility

to provide his relevant testimony to Fitzgerald without

a subpoena, which he rightly feared, because he knew his testimony

was on the face of it relevant and apparently unknown.

 

By extension, this adds an important contraint to Downey’s claim

that confidential sources should never be disclosed; clearly they must be

when there is an over-riding societal and criminal justice interest.

Woodward and Downey need to address this balance in their public

statements and apologies.

Posted in News and politics | Leave a comment

Mr. Woodward’s Sources

 
The Washington Post Editorial provided some mild support for their star reporter Bob Woodward, arguing that he should not be vilified for protecting the identity of his source in the complex Plame affair.  But this is only one issue to deal with.  Surely the Post needs to examine more carefully whether this source has deliberately abused confidentiality and lured this Star reporter to his downfall.  Was Mr Wilson the real target of this activity, or could it have been the liberal media?  Was this really payback for the years of needling the administration?  This may attribute too much planning for a group that is notoriously uncoordinated; but even if it is not intentional the only real damage from the Plame investigation may well be to the credibility of the New York Times and the Washington Post.  What then is the culpability of the Post in getting itself into this abysmal situation?
 
There is something disturbing about the current situation.   If I have it right, Woodward only told his editor about his secret after his source went to the prosecutor, Mr Fitzgerald.  Woodward then went or was subpoenaed to report on his secret.  So it appears that Fitzgerald knows who the source is already.  If so, what is all this gobbledegook about protecting sources all about?  Perhaps it is justifiable for Woodward to protect the source and his secret, but if his source has already revealed himself to the prosecutor, surely his confidentiality agreement is in tatters.  If the source has not already revealed himself directly, it surely appears that he or she has indirectly.  On the eve of the prosecutor’s report, rumors were flying (on Larry King’s show at least) that Woodward had a bombshell to report.  Woodward self deprecatingly lied to say he had none, but of course we now know that he did.  Could these rumors have been instigated by his confidential source?  if so, what were their purpose? 
 
What happens to a reporter when his confidential source turns on him and uses him?  How can he tell?  This is an issue the editorial page should grapple with.
 
 
As an aside, part of the problem seems to be Woodward’s split allegiance between his role as a star reporter and a "legendary" writer.  On the editorial on-line page, the editorial was followed by the ads repeated in part below.  Conflict of interest? 
 
When Downies was asked this question of being used by sources, he sidestepped with a generality:
 and a rule that appears to be designed to be broken:
Leonard Downie Jr.: I’ve gone overtime because there are so many questions, many of which I just can’t get to, so this will be the last. Any time a reporter enters into a confidential source relationship, it must not be violated, no matter what the source’s motive may be.
 
Under what conditions can and should a confidential source relationship be broken; or is it truly "never!"
 

Current affairs expert, reporter Bob Woodward is a legend whose recent books include "Plan of Attack" and "Bush at War". Call us today and let our 21 years of experience go to work for you.
www.nationwidespeakers.com

Save on Bob Woodward Books
Save on great, Bob Woodward books, and enjoy exciting work from other history authors. Join the History Book Club to get four books for $4, plus a free tote, with membership.
www.historybookclub.com
Book Bob Woodward for Your Next Meeting
He’s the most famous investigative reporter in America with seven #1 books and has won nearly every American journalism prize there is.
Posted in News and politics | Leave a comment

hysteria in Germany – dead ducks not H5N1 – just rat poison

"Die Todesursache für die Graugänse können wir mit sehr hoher Wahrscheinlichkeit auf eine Vergiftung zurückführen", sagte Stefan Bent, Präsident des Landesuntersuchungsamtes in Koblenz. Das Gift sei in den Mägen von 12 der 22 Gänse festgestellt worden."
 
There were many semi-hysterical articles about bird flu making it to Germany (of course it may well be there) but the articles about the dead grey geese in Wiedum were much more widespread than the following day’s note that explained the most probable cause – rat poison.
 
Similary, headlines flashed about bird flu in Canada’s wild bird populations – but again those are part of Canada’s sensible first census of their wild bird population, and since the birds were NOT dead, the H5 virus found in them is much more likely to be the more innocuous H5N2 than the deadly H5N1.
 
Still, Canada is carrying out this census, and only spotty individual efforts are being conducted here in the US of A.
 
Instead of spending Billions on a vaccine that may or may not work, perhaps we should be spending millions on helping Asian countries innoculate their birds, chickens at least, with a vaccine we know really works.
Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment

Talking about Bird flu case confirmed in Greece – Bird Flu – MSNBC.com

 

Quote

Bird flu case confirmed in Greece – Bird Flu – MSNBC.com
Skip

 

So who is following the birds – ducks, gulls, etc – coming from Siberia over Alaska and then down the flyways to the continental US?  It is not just Europe that needs to be concerned — surely we should be setting up special monitoring in Alaska.  It may even be possibel to begin innoculating these birds with H5N1 flu vaccine.  Where is the public health planning that might begin taking this and other precautionary steps??

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment